Soh Wen Yi Final Thesis Submission Title Page To Appendices PDF

MANAGING HERITAGE LANGUAGE RELEVANCE AND
LANGUAGE REVITALISATION: THE CASE OF MALACCA

PORTUGUESE CREOLE
SOH WEN YI
FACULTY OF LANGUAGES AND LINGUISTICS

UNIVERSITY OF MALAYA
KUALA LUMPUR
2015
MANAGING HERITAGE LANGUAGE RELEVANCE
AND LANGUAGE REVITALISATION: THE CASE OF
MALACCA PORTUGUESE CREOLE
SOH WEN YI
THESIS SUBMITTED IN FULFILMENT OF THE

REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF
PHILOSOPHY
FACULTY OF LANGUAGES AND LINGUISTICS

KUALA LUMPUR
2015
ORIGINAL LITERARY WORK DECLARATION
Name of Candidate: (I.C/Passport No: )

Registration/Matric No:
Name of Degree:
Title of Project Paper/Research Report/Dissertation/Thesis (“this Work”):
Field of Study:
I do solemnly and sincerely declare that:

(1) I am the sole author/writer of this Work;
(2) This Work is original;
(3) Any use of any work in which copyright exists was done by way of fair dealing
and for permitted purposes and any excerpt or extract from, or reference to or
reproduction of any copyright work has been disclosed expressly and
sufficiently and the title of the Work and its authorship have been
acknowledged in this Work;
(4) I do not have any actual knowledge nor do I ought reasonably to know that the
making of this work constitutes an infringement of any copyright work;
(5) I hereby assign all and every rights in the copyright to this Work to the
University of Malaya (“UM”), who henceforth shall be owner of the copyright
in this Work and that any reproduction or use in any form or by any means
whatsoever is prohibited without the written consent of UM having been first
had and obtained;
(6) I am fully aware that if in the course of making this Work I have infringed any
copyright whether intentionally or otherwise, I may be subject to legal action
or any other action as may be determined by UM.
Candidate’s Signature Date:
Subscribed and solemnly declared before,
Witness’s Signature Date:
Name:
Designation:
ABSTRACT
This thesis is set against the backdrop of the wider multilingual and postcolonial
context and local language revitalisation efforts. The language in study, Malacca
Portuguese Creole (MPC), is a Portuguese-based contact language undergoing language
shift, spoken as heritage language by a concentrated population of approximately 800
people (Baxter, 2013) in the main research site, Portuguese Settlement (PS), Malacca,
West Malaysia. The development of MPC and people identifying with MPC as their
heritage language can be traced to the arrival of Portuguese in Malacca in 1511. The
bottom-up research design of this thesis is drawn from Constructivist Grounded Theory
(Charmaz, 2006, 2014). To understand and explain gaps between views and actions
(initially driven by a perceived gap between language revitalisation efforts and reactions
towards efforts) and as guided by questions and leads from emerging concepts and
categories, the purpose and focus of research were redirected from a general investigation
into MPC language revitalisation to capturing the experience, expressivity and dynamics
of PS MPC-speaking group members, as illuminated by the language revitalisation
process. The initial data collection employed interviewing as the main research
instrument. Research participants were MPC speakers involved in revitalisation efforts
and those who would be recipients of efforts. The research process was iterative as
researcher moved between research procedures including data collection, coding,
constant comparative method, memo-writing and theoretical sampling; analysis and
conceptualisation were simultaneous. Theoretical sampling, the second phase of data
collection according to theoretical relevance, proceeded by contacting research
participants, analysing survey, examination of writings in and about MPC and its speakers
and using literature as data. This thesis proposes a substantive model which brings the
dynamics and voices of a contact-language-speaking group to the forefront. The core
iii
category of the model, managing relevance of heritage language, can be related to the
basic social process of coping mechanisms in response to social development, in the quest
of a basic social process or central phenomenon as pursued in a Grounded Theory study.
It refers to the process of keeping one’s heritage language relevant as an aspect of one’s
social life while maintaining other parts of social life and self-identifications. MPC-
speaking group members who have initiated language revitalisation efforts have been
motivated to take things into their own hands, showing their coping mechanisms more
explicitly, in comparison with non-language-revitalisation-actors whose coping strategies
are less explicit. The process of managing heritage language relevance helps construct a
particular sense of self: a self identifying with a MPC-speaking heritage; this forms the
socio-psychological and emotional dimension of the process. To understand this self-
managing dimension and because self-constructing is not an isolated process, a socio-
historical or socio-cultural dimension enters the picture. This new way of looking at the
dynamics of a contact-language-speaking group in managing heritage language relevance
can be applied to promote, plan and integrate the relevance of heritage language in future
language revitalisation efforts. The present study is the first in employing Grounded
Theory to conduct a formal research on MPC and the first to explore the MPC language
revitalisation process cycle.
iv
ABSTRAK
Tesis ini meliputi konteks umum, iaitu konteks berbilang bahasa dan lepas
penjajahan dan konteks tempatan, usaha mempergiatkan bahasa. Bahasa yang dikaji,
Bahasa Kriol Portugis Melaka (MPC), ialah satu bahasa kontak berdasarkan Bahasa
Portugis yang merupakan bahasa warisan bagi suatu populasi sebanyak 800 orang
(Baxter, 2013) dan sedang mengalami pengalihan bahasa di tempat kajian,
Perkampungang Portugis (PS), Melaka, Semenanjung Malaysia. Perkembangan MPC
dan mereka yang mengidentifikasikan diri dengan MPC sebagai bahasa warisan boleh
dikesan bekas langkahnya ke tahun 1511 apabila orang Portugis menjejaki Melaka.
Perancangan penyelidikan tesis ini merujuk kepada Constructivist Grounded Theory
(Charmaz, 2006, 2014). Untuk memahami kekurangan respons terhadap usaha
mempergiatkan MPC yang merupakan motivasi penyelidikan ini sementara mengikuti
konsep dan kategori yang timbul daripada penyelidikan, objektif dan focus tesis ini
berkembang daripada suatu penyelidikan umum usaha mempergiatkan lagi MPC kepada
penyelidikan yang mengenai pengalaman anggota masyarakat yang menutur MPC dalam
pengurusan bahasa warisan mereka yang terancam. Pengumpulan data bermula dengan
temuduga sebagai instrumen utama penyelidikan. Peserta penyelidikan terdiri daripada
mereka yang terlibat dalam usaha mempergiatkan bahasa dan mereka yang merupakan
penerima usaha tersebut. Proses penyelidikan adalah bersifat lelaran sementara
penyelidik megulang-ulangkan proses-proses seperti pengumpulan data, pengekodan,
perbandingan kod, penulisan memo dan pengumpulan data bersifat teoretikal;
penganalisasian data dan pengkonsepan dijalankan serentak. Pengumpulan data bersifat
teoretikal yang merupakan tahap kedua pengumpulan data mengikut kaitan teoretikal
dijalankan dengan menghubungi peserta penyelidikan, menganalisasi tinjauan,
menganalisasi kerja yang ditulis dalam MPC dan yang mengenai MPC, dan merujuk
kepada sorotan kajian sebagai data. Tesis ini mengemukakan suatu model substantif bagi
v
memahami pengalaman, daya pengungkapan dan dinamiks masyarakat berbahasa kontak
di PS. Kategori utama, pengurusan bahasa warisan terancam, yang timbul daripada proses
penyelidikan boleh dikaitkan dengan strategi pengurusan proses umum terhadap
perubahan masyarakat. Ia merujuk kepada proses menguruskan bahasa warisan yang
merupakan suatu aspek kehidupan masyarakat sementara bersambung dengan aspek-
aspek kehidupan yang lain. Terdapat anggota masyarakat berbahasa MPC yang
digalakkan dengan motivasi untuk menentukan nasib sendiri dengan memulakan atau
terlibat dalam usaha mempergiatkan MPC dan menunjukkan strategi pengurusan kaitan
bahasa warisan terancam yang lebih jelas. Proses pengurusan kaitan bahasa warisan
terancam menyumbang kepada pembinaan diri yang mengidentifikasi dengan warisan
berbahasa MPC; ini merupakan suatu dimensi psikologi dan emosi. Bagi memahami
dimensi psikologi dan emosi dan oleh sebab pembinaan diri bukan suatu proses
independen, suatu lagi dimensi sejarah dan budaya diterokai. Perspektif tesis ini yang
menerokai dinamiks masyarakat yang berbahasa kontak sebagai bahasa warisan dan
bagaimana mereka mengurus kaitan bahasa tersebut boleh menyumbang kepada
perancangan dan pembelajaran bahasa bagi usaha mempergiatkan bahasa yang akan
datang. Tesis ini juga merupakan kajian pertama yang merujuk kepada Grounded Theory
sebagai reka bentuk penyelidikan MPC dan kajian formal pertama ke atas usaha
mempergiatkan bahasa warisan terancam, MPC.
vi
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to extend my heartfelt gratitude to the family and Portuguese
Settlement community who have assisted me and made this thesis possible. To Mama
Anne (De Mello), Uncle Gerard (De Costa), the late Carrieanne De Costa, and Roseanne
De Costa, words cannot describe how much I appreciate your kindness, generousity and
hospitalibity in making me feel like home and helping me in every possible way. More
names could not be given credit here to protect their identity as research participants of
this study.
To all participants of this study, thank you very much for your time and patience in
sharing a part of your world with me. To go back to Malacca for my doctoral study holds
sentimental values in my heart as I spent seven years of my childhood in Malacca. The
research participants of this study, as well as the Portuguese Settlement community as a
whole, have made my research journey a mind-broadening one as I reflected upon how if
I had not done this research, I would only have a simple and superficial understanding of
their experiences, and to do so would be a loss on my part in embracing multiculturalism
and multilingualism in a fuller sense.
The present study would not have taken place without my supervisor, Associate
Professor Dr. Stefanie Pillai, who has inspired, encouraged and guided me right from the
beginning. Thank you very much, Dr Stef, for your constructive comments and always
sending help and positive vibes my way. I really appreciate how you allowed me the time
and space to think things through and reserve time to talk to me about my progress while
I worked remotely. Thank you for sharing your thoughts and ideas not only about my
work but also about life as I embarked on the chapters on marriage and motherhood. I
always remember our first meeting back in 2011 to talk about the possibility of working
on MPC. I especially remember how you referred to your doctoral supervisor as someone
vii
you could talk to and someone with whom students would “reach for the stars”. And now,
it is my turn to tell others the same.
Thank you to both reviewers and anonymous reviewers for the present study,
papers co-authored and the presentations of my work as well as co-authored works. Any
errors in this thesis are solely my own.
I would also like to say thank you to those of you who have shared works, advices
and recommendations with me. Thank you especially to Dr. Mario Pinharada Nunes, Dr.
Hugo Cardoso, Dr. Paolo Coluzzi, (Ruzaini) Fikri and James (N. Chancharu), for sharing
your works or others’ work with me.
To dear Cristiana (professora Maria Cristiana Casimiro), the universe does indeed
work in its mysterious ways when I recalled how when I was learning Portuguese during
the undergraduate years, I did not imagine that I would be working on a Portuguese-
related language one day. Thank you for the six great semesters during my undergraduate
studies, supporting my graduate studies application and that lovely day in Macau. As
many of your students and I have told you before, your compassion has been an
inspiration to us.
To my friends who have helped in one way or another, thank you for being part of
the journey of this study and of my life for some of you, especially Ling Jie (for always
giving me faith, love and taking care of me in Kuala Lumpur), Christine (for being my
awesome roommate who still feels like my roommate even though you are far away in
the land down under now), Ee Lee (for giving me assurance and acknowledgements
especially since our days in Cambridge), Austine (especially for driving me around in
Kuala Lumpur when I couldn’t and being the gangho person you are), muffs (for sending
positive vibes always) and the Kang siblings (Grace, Matthew and Edmond, for your work
and help).
viii
To my dear Aunt Siok Cheng, thank you for proofreading my work. My interest in
languages and pursuing higher learning could not have blossomed without you starting
me young. Thanks for all the books you have bought for me and hours spent with me on
readings and school works. Most importantly, thanks for your love, my dear Aunt Siok
Cheng and my granny or waipo, for these set me off on a life of kindness and moderation
as both of you have taught me so.
I would like to thank Min Tze’s parents, Mr. Hau Sia Lam and Mdm. Loi Kim
Tai, and siblings, Jasmine and Min Shen, for your support all along and for being my
wonderful “second home”.
Thank you to my dear brother, Wen Hann, and sister-in-law, Kaishin, for all the
nice treats that made me feel better during the conduct of this research even though you
might not know, and for always sending love and encouragement my way.
Dear Min Tze and Jean Ann, thank you for lighting up my world and being so
amazing. People always talk about how doing a doctoral study is similar to walking in a
tunnel in darkness. Both of you kept me believing that I would see lights at the end of the
tunnel of my doctoral study as you have been the lights all along. Just in case if I ever
have more than one child and you are reading this, I want you to know that, even though
I may not know you yet, but I do know that you will be part of this amazing team we are
on.
Finally, to my dearest parents, Mr. Soh Chee Son and Mdm. Lim Siang Cheng,
this thesis is dedicated to both of you. Both of you have always believed in me and
allowed me the time and space to grow and pursue what matters to me. Thank you for
your love and support and I love both of you so much.
ix
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Abstract ............................................................................................................................iii
Abstrak .............................................................................................................................. v
Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................... vii
Table of Contents .............................................................................................................. x
List of Figures ................................................................................................................. xv
List of Tables.................................................................................................................. xvi
List of Symbols and Abbreviations ............................................................................... xvii
List of Appendices .......................................................................................................xviii
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION .................................................................................. 1
1.1 Motivations of Research .......................................................................................... 1
1.2 Developing a Research Focus .................................................................................. 3
1.3 Purpose Statement and Research Questions ............................................................ 6
1.4 Significance ............................................................................................................. 6
1.5 Thesis Outline .......................................................................................................... 8
CHAPTER 2: SOCIOLINGUISTIC BACKGROUND............................................... 9
2.1 Introduction.............................................................................................................. 9
2.2 The Pre-colonial Period ......................................................................................... 17
2.3 The Colonial Period ............................................................................................... 18
2.4 The Post-colonial Period, Independence and Nation Building .............................. 24
2.5 Education and Minority Groups in the 20th Century ............................................ 27
2.6 Present Trends of Language Shift.......................................................................... 30
2.7 Concluding Thoughts ............................................................................................ 34
x
CHAPTER 3: MAJOR CONCEPTS .......................................................................... 36
3.1 Introduction............................................................................................................ 36
3.2 Language and Discourses ...................................................................................... 37
3.3 Motivations, Self and Identity ............................................................................... 39
3.4 Ideologies ............................................................................................................... 41
3.5 Language Revitalisation ........................................................................................ 44
3.5.1 Overview .................................................................................................. 44
3.5.2 Planning and Policy .................................................................................. 50
3.5.3 Factors and Variables ............................................................................... 52
3.5.4 Evaluating Language Revitalisation ......................................................... 54
3.6 Contact Languages................................................................................................. 55
3.7 Concluding Thoughts ............................................................................................ 59
CHAPTER 4: THEORETICAL APPROACH .......................................................... 61
4.1 Introduction............................................................................................................ 61
4.2 Rationale for the Choice of Approach ................................................................... 61
4.3 How Grounded Theory Came About ..................................................................... 67
4.4 The Objectivist and Constructivist Orientations.................................................... 72
4.5 Grounded Theory Method ..................................................................................... 76
4.6 Considerations in Practice ..................................................................................... 80
4.7 Applications of Grounded Theory Method............................................................ 82
4.8 Summary ................................................................................................................ 84
CHAPTER 5: METHODS ........................................................................................... 85
5.1 Introduction............................................................................................................ 85
5.2 Pre-data collection ................................................................................................. 86
5.2.1 Research Participants ............................................................................... 86
xi
5.2.2 Core Setting .............................................................................................. 90
5.2.3 Ethics ........................................................................................................ 90
5.3 Data Collection ...................................................................................................... 91
5.4 Data Analysis ......................................................................................................... 94
5.4.1 Initial Coding ............................................................................................ 95
5.4.2 Focused Coding and Categorising .......................................................... 100
5.4.3 Theory building ...................................................................................... 102
5.4.4 Verification ............................................................................................. 107
5.5 Criteria: Credibility, Originality, Resonance and Usefulness ............................. 108
5.6 Summary .............................................................................................................. 109
CHAPTER 6: A SUBSTANTIVE MODEL.............................................................. 110
6.1 Introduction.......................................................................................................... 110
6.2 Building a Substantive Model ............................................................................. 114
6.3 The MPC Language Revitalisation Process Cycle .............................................. 118
6.3.1 Being Motivated to Revitalise MPC ...................................................... 121
6.3.1.1 Language revitalisation as channelling inner feelings and needs
122
6.3.1.2 Language revitalisation as restoring and reconstructing heritage
and relationships ..................................................................... 124
6.3.1.3 Language revitalisation as reclaiming ownership ................... 126
6.3.1.4 Language revitalisation as work opportunities........................ 128
6.3.2 Using Available and Creating Resources ............................................... 130
6.3.2.1 (Re)generating interest in MPC............................................... 130
6.3.2.2 Making use of available resources and creating resources...... 131
6.3.2.3 The community-external factor ............................................... 133
6.3.3 Mobilising Support ................................................................................. 135
xii
6.3.3.1 Reaching out to listening network(s) ...................................... 135
6.3.3.2 Understanding audience and spreading fun ............................ 136
6.3.3.3 Revaluing MPC ....................................................................... 137
6.3.4 Outcome of Efforts ................................................................................. 138
6.3.4.1 Perceiving MPC language revitalisation efforts ...................... 138
6.3.4.2 Reception of MPC language revitalisation efforts and materials
141
6.3.5 Continuing with MPC as Heritage and Identity ..................................... 146
6.3.5.1 Looking for communities of practice ...................................... 147
6.3.5.2 Learning MPC from fluent MPC speakers .............................. 149
6.3.5.3 Hoping for financial means and leadership ............................. 150
6.3.5.4 Representing and capturing the uniqueness of MPC .............. 151
6.3.6 Being Motivated to Speak and Learn MPC ............................................ 152
6.3.6.1 MPC speaking and learning as identity and self construction 152
6.3.6.2 MPC speaking and learning as restoring and reconstructing
heritage and relationships ........................................................ 153
6.3.6.3 Speaking and learning MPC as group and heritage survival... 154
6.3.7 Explicating Relationships between Sub-processes ................................. 155
6.4 The Continuum of Coping Strategies .................................................................. 157
6.5 Situating Findings in Wider Contexts.................................................................. 164
6.6 Close-to-heart Matters and Peoplehood............................................................... 166
6.7 Summary .............................................................................................................. 168
CHAPTER 7: DISCUSSION ..................................................................................... 171
7.1 Introduction.......................................................................................................... 171
7.2 Meanings of MPC Language Revitalisation Efforts ............................................ 174
7.3 Examining Discourses and Coping Strategies ..................................................... 183
xiii
7.3.1 Language Purism .................................................................................... 185
7.3.2 Language Ownership .............................................................................. 192
7.3.3 Literacy and Post-colonial Planning....................................................... 199
7.3.4 Language Acquisition and Transmission and Contemporary Trends .... 209
7.4 MPC Language Revitalisation ............................................................................. 214
7.5 Concluding Thoughts .......................................................................................... 225
CHAPTER 8: REFLECTIONS ................................................................................. 229
8.1 Introduction.......................................................................................................... 229
8.2 Reflections: MPC Language Revitalisation......................................................... 230
8.3 Reflections: A Constructivist Grounded Theory Approach ................................ 234
8.4 Reflections: Situating the Present Study in Wider Contexts ............................... 242
8.5 Concluding Thoughts .......................................................................................... 246
References ..................................................................................................................... 249
List of Publications and Papers Presented .................................................................... 265
Appendices .................................................................................................................... 266
xiv
LIST OF FIGURES
Page number
Figure 3.1: Theoretical framework ................................................................................. 37
Figure 4.1: A visual representation of a Grounded Theory (Charmaz, 2014: 18, originally
appeared in Tweed & Charmaz, 2011: 133) ................................................................... 78
Figure 4.2: Illustrating the iterative Grounded Theory Method research process .......... 79
Figure 6.1: Building a substantive model (to be read from bottom-up)........................ 116
Figure 6.2: The MPC language revitalisation process cycle ......................................... 120
Figure 6.3: Explicating relationships between sub-processes of MPC language

revitalisation process ..................................................................................................... 156
Figure 6.4: The continuum of coping strategies............................................................ 158
Figure 6.5: Situating the MPC language revitalisation process cycle and the continuum of
coping strategies in wider contexts ............................................................................... 165
Figure 6.6: Close-to-heart matters and peoplehood ...................................................... 167
Figure 6.7: A substantive model of managing heritage language relevance................. 169
Figure 8.1: An overview of how this thesis developed a focus .................................... 235
xv
LIST OF TABLES
Page number
Table 1.1: Previous research on MPC or MPC-speaking group ....................................... 3
Table 4.1: Insights from pragmatism and sociology ....................................................... 68
Table 4.2: Development of conceptual terminology ....................................................... 71
Table 4.3: Epistemological underpinnings of Grounded Theory .................................... 74
Table 4.4: Objectivist and Constructivist Grounded Theory .......................................... 75
Table 5.1: List of research participants ........................................................................... 87
Table 5.2: Excerpts of conversation with A1 .................................................................. 98
Table 5.3: Excerpts of conversation with A3 .................................................................. 99
Table 5.4 : Excerpts of conversation with A5 ................................................................. 99
Table 5.5 : Excerpts of conversation with A7 .............................................................. 100
Table 5.6: From initial codes to a focused code............................................................ 102
Table 5.7: Examples from a theory building process .................................................... 103
Table 5.8: Excerpts from memos .................................................................................. 105
Table 5.9: Criteria researchers can aim for (Charmaz, 2014: 355-357)........................ 109
xvi
LIST OF SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS
MPC : Malacca Portuguese Creole (Kristang)
PS : Portuguese Settlement, Malacca
xvii
LIST OF APPENDICES
Page
number
Appendix A: Information Sheet, Consent Form and Honorarium

267
Reception/Declining Form…………………………………………………..
Appendix B: Part I Survey and Part II Guiding Questions for

271
Conversation…………………………………………………………………
xviii
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1 Motivations of Research
This thesis was initially driven by observations during fieldtrips to the Portuguese
Settlement (PS), Malacca in 2011-2012. During the project fieldtrips ranging from days
to a week and staying in or around the PS most of the time, it was observed that even
though Malacca Portuguese Creole (MPC, also known as Kristang, Serani and Malacca
Portuguese) related efforts attempted in the past decades have attracted some attention in
the media and among academics, few people could tell much about or had participated
much if at all in these efforts when asked. In contrast, more could be shared by group
members about having seen or participated in documentary production about the life and
culture of the PS community. PS is not geographically isolated as word settlement would
suggest; it is connected to other neighbourhoods across the streets on the different sides
of PS. After data collection for this thesis began in 2013, positive perceptions of their
heritage language and language revitalisation efforts continued to be observed, so was a
seemingly perceived gap between the positive perceptions and reaction towards language
revitalisation efforts. The dynamics of the PS MPC-speaking group was observed in its
natural setting.
The little representation of the experiences and expressivity among the PS MPC-
speaking group members from group members’ perspectives in literature also justifies the
need of this study. Earlier MPC wordlists or linguistic treatments can be found in works
such as Rêgo (1942) and Hancock (1975) before it was eventually documented in its fuller
form, in the form of a grammar and dictionary (Baxter, 1988; Baxter & De Silva, 2004).
The year I embarked on MPC research had been very timely and interesting as a major
celebration was held to commemorate the arrival of the Portuguese from 1509-1511
onwards in Malacca. MPC language classes were initiated and conducted, as part of the
commemoration, although the classes were eventually closed and then resumed in 2012.
1
This is not the first time efforts are initiated to draw attention to the endangered status of
and promote the use of MPC. The first Save Our Portuguese Heritage Conference was
held in 1995. In 1996, another conference, A Revival of Spoken Kristang and the
Development of the Malacca-Portuguese Heritage, was held in Malacca. The year 2015
saw a second addition to the Save Our Portuguese Conference series after a decade. Apart
from conferences and media coverage, there have been occasionally proactive voices
from the core MPC-speaking group in PS about heritage-related matters (e.g. Sta Maria,
1982; Fernandis, 2003), and some language revitalisation efforts such as language classes
and sporadic linguistic compilations. However, the PS MPC-speaking group members
appear to remain underrepresented in mainstream publications and media until recently
because of campaigns against the land reclamation along the coastline of PS. The choice
of reference to the language in study as MPC will be discussed in Chapter 2. PS, the
choice of research site in projects involved and in this thesis for practical reasons, makes
up the core and concentrated MPC-speaking population in Malaysia.
Previous research on MPC or MPC-speaking group has focused on five areas:
documentation, description of grammar or lexicon-related categories, language shift or
maintenance, social and cultural studies, and narratives (see Table 1.1).
2
Table 1.1: Previous research on MPC or MPC-speaking group
Nature of MPC work Examples of work

Documentation, e.g. dictionary, books Baxter and Silva (2004)
Marbeck (1995, 1996, 2011a, 2011b,
2011c)
Pillai (2013)
Rêgo (1932, 1938)
Description of grammar or lexicon- Baxter (1988, 1990)
related categories Hancock (1969, 1973)
Rêgo (1942)
Thurgood & Thurgood (1996)
Language shift or maintenance Journal articles:
David and Noor (1999)
Lee (2011)
Maros et al (2014)
Dissertation or thesis:
Sudesh (2000)
Lee (2003)
Social and cultural studies (e.g. O’Neilll (2008)
Language, culture and identity, family Pillai, Soh & Kajita (2014)
language policy) Sarkissian (1997, 2000, 2005)
Narratives Sta Maria (1982)
The younger generation’s language shift away from MPC has been confirmed by
researchers such as Baxter (1990; 2005), Nunes (1996), David and Noor (1998), Hancock
(1969; 2009), Sudesh (2000) and Lee (2003, 2011). Despite some revitalisation efforts,
there is no formal work done to document and investigate the revitalisation of MPC other
than some suggestions made about preserving MPC (e.g. Baxter, 2005:31-33).
1.2 Developing a Research Focus
Employing a bottom up approach as Constructivist Grounded Theory (see Chapter
4 and 5), it is necessary to inform readers at this stage on how this thesis came to focus
on what it does before purpose statement and research questions are presented in the next
section. At this early stage, it suffices to say that Grounded Theory Methodology (more
on this in Chapter 4), the umbrella term for approaches sharing common practices and
3
underpinnings of a Grounded Theory study as proposed by Bryant and Charmaz (2007a,
2007b), “serves as a way to learn about the worlds we study and a method for developing
theories to understand them” (Charmaz, 2014: 33).
Initially, the purpose of the present study was set in a general way: to explore (i)
MPC language revitalisation efforts that are initiated from the grassroots level and (ii) the
recipient group’s reaction towards these efforts and possible future efforts. The purpose
of research was motivated by the gap between language revitalisation efforts and PS
MPC-speaking group’s reactions towards the efforts, and the gap in literature on language
revitalisation efforts of MPC. The initial main leading research questions were:
i. What are the bottom-up MPC language revitalisation efforts?
ii. What are the reactions of the PS MPC-speaking group members towards
MPC language revitalisation?
As this research started shaping up with concepts and categories emerging from
data, a theme emerged too. In the quest of a social process or central phenomenon as
pursued in a Grounded Theory study (Charmaz, 2006, 2014), the process of managing
heritage language relevance comes out strongly to capture research participants’
experience as reconstructed in their discourse and coping strategies and as co-constructed
with researcher. The process of managing heritage language relevance can be related to
the basic social process of coping mechanisms and refers to the process of keeping one’s
heritage language relevant as an aspect of one’s social life while maintaining other parts
of social life and identifications. This came as a result of pursuing further than the initial
focus on the what’s and how’s of language revitalisation to understand the why’s of the
language revitalisation process by persistently questioning What function does it serve?
in which the word it can be, among others, a code, a category or a contrast in meanings
or actions. Throughout the research process, in addition to the focus on meanings and
4
actions, there is a focus on unfolding temporal sequences as they are linked in a process
and lead to change as single events become linked as part of a larger whole (Charmaz,
2014). Linking temporal sequences leads to filling up the sub-processes of the language
revitalisation process: from how it begins to how it is perceived and received and where
it may lead. By constantly comparing events and experiences, and questioning the implicit
meanings, rules, and actions at play, contrasts were detected as the gaps to address the
mismatch (i) between language revitalisation efforts and reactions and (ii) between
positive perceptions of heritage language and actual practices.
The MPC-speaking group, with a focus on the core MPC-speaking group
members in the PS, is placed on a continuum. This continuum depicts the dynamics of
managing heritage language relevance among community members, from seemingly
having a certain time slot for MPC to taking the initiative to reconnect or even promote
and revitalise MPC, to understand how meanings and relevance of MPC are negotiated
and by doing so, how one’s self is managed via drawing from different accumulating and
interacting ideologies. Theoretical links between managing heritage language relevance
and its use as a tool in self-managing are uncovered. The pursuit of clues and ideas on
self-managing was mainly driven by the constant questioning of the function of managing
heritage relevance and partly driven by the natural progress towards a basic social process
in Grounded Theory; the word basic here can be interpreted as more universal, more
abstract and more general. Throughout writing this thesis, there has been a constant debate
on the wording as the positioning between a researcher in linguistic training and one
following a Grounded Theory approach; the debate eventually had to be balanced
between linguistic jargons or terminology and a natural progress towards more general
and abstract concept to situate the substantive area studied in a broader context. Decisions
on wording were made based on considering how best this thesis can be understood by
general readers with concepts presented in Chapter 3.
5
1.3 Purpose Statement and Research Questions
Based on data, the purpose of this research was thus redirected to capture the
experience of research participants as co-constructed between researcher and research
participants. It became the purpose of this research to explore how members of a minority-
and contact-language-speaking group manage the relevance of their heritage language as
illuminated by the bottom-up language revitalisation process. The main research
questions were then reworded as:
i. How is MPC relevance managed by negotiating and constructing its
meanings against the backdrop of the language revitalisation process and
the wider multilingual and post-colonial backdrop?
ii. What implications can be drawn from experiences, strategies and tensions
in managing heritage language relevance?
1.4 Significance
This section presents the significance of this research in a general way. The gaps
that the present study eventually filled in the body of literature and in wider contexts will
be revisited in Chapter 8 (Section 8.4). This is consistent with the emerging and
exploratory nature of a study employing Grounded Theory.
This thesis proposes a new way of looking at the dynamics of a minority, contact
language-speaking group facing language endangerment and managing heritage language
relevance, as illuminated by the MPC language revitalisation process cycle. This process
is one in which little is known in the first place as it is relatively new following its formal
documentation in the 1980s. Though there had been language classes in the PS from time
to time, a closer understanding of the language classes referred to by research participants
and other PS MPC-speaking group members did not refer to MPC-oriented language
6
classes until the recent years. The previous Portuguese language classes had not been
MPC-oriented, in that those classes were conducted not for the purpose of MPC language
acquisition and transmission. Most importantly, though MPC would have been used in
these earlier language classes, either for communication or for the purpose of comparison,
the classes were conducted with an orientation on European Portuguese, as gathered from
research participants.
This thesis is also the first study that employs Grounded Theory Methodology, or
more specifically, Constructivist Grounded Theory, and the first formal research to
profile and explore the MPC language revitalisation process cycle. This study has
proceeded bearing in mind the co-construction between researcher and research
participants to learn and conceptualise the experience of the PS community and the
importance to involve community-driven and collaborative efforts when planning
language revitalisation (e.g. Fishman, 1991; Hinton, 2001; Grenoble & Whaley, 2006).
In researching a part of the PS MPC-speaking group members’ social life, social
representation and self-managing via a bottom-top approach, it was not assumed and
presupposed, but was learned in the research process, that the reciprocal relationship
between self-managing and managing heritage language relevance underlies initiating or
reactions towards language revitalisation. The present study provides a new way of
approaching studies on MPC and PS MPC-speaking group members (see Chapter 6).
This study will also contribute to contact language (revitalisation) studies which
are underrepresented, either due to the lack of studies on contact language revitalisation
efforts or due to the lack of contact language revitalisation efforts to begin with, compared
to studies of language endangerment and language revitalisation efforts on other
languages. An understanding of the meanings of MPC language revitalisation efforts to
group members was sought and the revitalisation process was evaluated up to a certain
extent (as discussed in Chapter 7).
7
1.5 Thesis Outline
The outcome of research is presented in eight chapters. Chapter 1 presents a
general introduction to the focus of this thesis, informing readers on motivations and
justifications of research and how the focus of this thesis was derived. Chapter 2 presents
the socio-historical and political development of MPC and PS MPC-speaking group
members, with a general focus on how the socio-historical and political development has
led up to the present interacting and accumulating ideologies. Chapter 3 discusses the
major concepts in which this thesis is built around and how these major concepts provide
the theoretical lens for approaching and understanding the case in study. Chapter 4
introduces the theoretical approach of this thesis, while in Chapter 5, how Constructivist
Grounded Theory was drawn upon is presented. To address the first research question,
Chapter 6 presents the discourses and coping strategies of the group in study in managing
the relevance of their heritage language that are abstracted from the MPC language
revitalisation process cycle where the sub-processes are also examined. Chapter 7
addresses the second research question by looking at what can be drawn from research
findings in relation to language-related topics and to language revitalisation. Chapter 8
concludes this thesis by reflecting upon working on MPC and employing Constructivist
Grounded Theory.
8
CHAPTER 2: SOCIOLINGUISTIC BACKGROUND
2.1 Introduction
This chapter looks at socio-historical and political development of MPC, research
participants and research site. One main argument developed in this chapter and
throughout this thesis is the present sociolinguistic consequences have to be understood
against the socio-historical, cultural and political experience of the group in study. A
similar call-out has been expressed by one of the most representative voices in terms of
his people’s development, heritage and culture (Sta Maria, 1982: 11):
Unless we are intimately conscious of our evolutionary beginnings, we would not

be able to fully appreciate nor comprehend or criticise those contributory factors
or the consequences of what some had cause to label “our accidental historic
origins”.
In a way, this chapter lays out one side of the story, the macro-sociolinguistic background,
especially the change in power, socio-economic, and linguistic development, to analyse
linguistic development and ideologies. This paves the way to understanding the PS MPC-
speaking group members’ experiences, expressivity and dynamics in Chapter 6 and 7.
Chapter 6 presents a substantive model to approach the conceptions and
conceptualisations of PS MPC-speaking group members’ experiences in relation to their
heritage language against the background of wider contexts and of the local language
revitalisation efforts.
There is no formal consensus on the name of the language though it is categorised
under other languages by the government. It is referred to in Malay as Bahasa Serani,
‘Serani language’, or Bahasa Portugis, ‘Portuguese language’, in documents such as
sections in documents requiring self-reporting of mother tongue or language skills in
school or for the use in government sectors. The status of MPC as a creole is mentioned
in the government-related media platform in Malaysia, as exemplified in the government
of Malaysia’s official portal: “A small number of Malaysians have Caucasian ancestry
9
and speak creole languages, such as the Portuguese based Malacca Creoles, and the
Spanish-based Chavacano language” (The Government of Malaysia, 2013). In the
Malaysian context, in official documents and forms, the Portuguese descendants are
classified as Lain-Lain (Malay, ‘others’) or Others, not fitting into other broad state-
defined categories: Malay, Chinese and Indian. Although they were accorded some
privileges reserved for Bumiputra citizens (Malay, ‘son of the soil’, this status is reserved
for those categorised as Malay by the Federal Constitution and the indigenous population
of Malaysia), such as the right to invest in certain national unit trusts schemes (see the
website of Amanah Saham Nasional Berhad
http://www.asnb.com.my/english/eligibility.htm), they are not classified as Bumiputra
Pillai, Soh & Kajita, 2014).
As a bottom-up, exploratory approach was employed, the literature review done
prior to fieldwork was done generally to set parameters for research (see Chapter 4 & 5).
Though I was aware of the debates for and against the use of the word creole in referring
to a contact language that has come to be used as the heritage language and ethnic marker
of a group of people with a common heritage, a deeper grasp of the different viewpoints
was only brought into the picture at a later stage. Although this thesis does not deal
directly with the origin and nature of MPC, this thesis was written with the awareness of
the debates for and against creole and also how it can weigh in on a researcher’s analysis
and positioning. The choice of MPC in the present study follows the registered name of
the language in the UNESCO Atlas of the World’s Languages in Danger (Moseley, 2010)
and in the Endangered Languages Archive (Pillai, 2013). Such a decision takes into
consideration that the name of the language is registered as such internationally, and is
made known in the literature with this name with a certain level of variation (e.g. Malacca
Creole Portuguese) while, similar to other researchers who have worked on MPC, I was
Grounded Theoryaware of the local names or some group members’ preferred name,
10
namely Kristang, Serani and (Antique) Malacca Portuguese (Baxter, 1988, 2012; O’ Neill
2008).
The term Kristang is used in referring to three referents: (i) the name of the
heritage language, (ii) the people who identify with the MPC-speaking heritage, and (iii)
the Catholic faith (Baxter, 1988, 2005, 2012; O’Neilll, 2008; Hancock, 2009). Baxter
(2012) has also discussed the recent signs of change in the name of the language, from
Kristang to Portuguese, in relation to several social factors: a growing self-identity in
response to the partial bumiputera status and within contexts of the wider recognition of
the Malayo-Portuguese culture, tourism discourse, the influence from the presence of
European Portuguese tourists and others. The presence and prominence of Portuguese
elements in the PS MPC-speaking group members’ culture, whether imported or adapted,
has also been observed by Sarkissian (1997, 2000, 2005). It must be made clear that the
choice of name used in this thesis is not meant to downgrade or devalue the language or
the people in any sense. If there comes a day the MPC-speaking group members have
come to make a collective decision on the names of their people and their heritage
language, I will very much gladly use the name(s) chosen by group members.
The historical account holds that the Portuguese conquest of Malacca started in
1511 and lasted for 130 years. It is generally held that MPC is borne out of the
intermarriage between Portuguese and local residents though the real picture might have
been more complicated and less romanticised. The diversity of the elements that make up
the group of people who identify with a MPC-speaking heritage has come to be
recognised in academic works while portrayals of the group of people may vary to a
certain extent or be more romanticised in capturing the diversity of the people’s elements
in some accounts, such as in interviews, narratives and travel guides. In the MPC
dictionary co-authored by Baxter with a late PS MPC-speaking group member, Baxter
and De Silva (2004) introduce MPC as in the following excerpt:
11
Contrary to what has sometimes been claimed by lay authors, Kristang is not
sixteenth-century Portuguese. Rather, it is a Creole language, a language born
of the contacts between speakers of Portuguese and speakers of local and other
languages. Certainly, the large majority of its vocabulary is derived from older
varieties of Portuguese, along with contributions from Malay and several other
languages. However, its grammar and its phonology both display considerable
Malay influence, as well as Portuguese influence, and some input from Hokkien
and Indian varieties of Creole Portuguese (Baxter, 1983, 1998, 1990).
(Baxter & De Silva, 2004: vii).
The presence of the Portuguese elements and the lack of a consensus on the
naming of the language and people in study are observed in official documents and media.
The following two excerpts are some of the depictions of the MPC-speaking group and
the PS in digital media and on the official Malacca tourism website. The Portuguese link
is accentuated in the first excerpt via the comparison of the Portuguese Square Malacca
to Lisbon while the second excerpt highlights how the presence of PS and PS MPC-
speaking group make Malacca different from other states in Malaysia.
Portuguese Square Malacca also known as Mini Lisbon symbolises the

Portuguese community in Malacca. The square is the culmination of Portuguese
culture in its splendour and colours where (there are) descendants of Malay and
Portuguese intermarriages since the colonisation of Portuguese in the state.
(Attractions in Malaysia, 2012)
Malacca is the only state that has a Portuguese settlement founded in 1930. The
inhabitants of this place (is) named Sua Chang Padre (Father Land) in conjunction
with its founder. People living here are Eurasian of Portuguese descent living as
fishermen.
The Portuguese Catholic religious practice and speak Cristang or Cristao. Ethnic
Portuguese in Malacca provides traditional life, language, customs and music that
appears unique. The most popular dance is Beranyo and Frapeirra. Christians also
celebrate festivals with great (enthusiasm) including Christmas Day and Easter
Festival San Pedra (Pedro).
(Melaka State Government, 2012)
The present propositions on the origin and nature of MPC are primarily put
forward by Baxter (1988, 1996, 2012, 2013), building on previous works (e.g. Bickerton,
1988). Based on decades of research, Baxter (2012: 115) writes that the people who
identify with a MPC-speaking heritage are “the descendants of Portuguese, Indo-
12
Portuguese, Malayo-Portuguese and diverse camp followers present in Malacca at the
time of the Dutch takeover” in 1641. The descendants are said to be admixed with
Chinese, Indian, Malay, Dutch, Sri Lankan, Filipino and English elements. The origins
of the emergence of various Portuguese-based or –derived contact languages including
MPC can be traced back to the Portuguese strategies in coping with a critical manpower
problem in Asian colonies as maritime trade routes were conquered and trading posts
were established (Baxter, 1996, 2012; Baxter & De Silva, 2004; Holm, 1989). Baxter
(1988) points out that one cannot be definite about whether a stable Portuguese-based
pidgin had arrived in Malacca. The genesis of MPC, either involving possible influences
from West African Pidgin Portuguese or Indian elements, is discussed in Baxter (1988,
1996), aligning the birth of contact Portuguese varieties to the formation of fort creoles
(Bickerton, 1988). Based on available documentations and foundation dates of the earliest
Portuguese establishments, Baxter (1996) proposes that the earlier form of MPC was
likely to have had an initially independent development followed by inflow influences
from India, namely of pidgin Portuguese, L2 Portuguese and Creole Portuguese.
Having worked on MPC in the 1960s, Hancock (1975, 2009, 2015) is of the
opinion that MPC has its origins in the early Portuguese lingua franca or low Portuguese
which is said to have probably originated in the 15th century on the West African coast.
According to Hancock (2009, 2015), MPC, a trade contact language that possibly
developed from the earlier Mediterranean Sabir, was carried by Lusitanian seaman to the
Near and Far East, and to Central and South America. MPC, both spoken in Malacca and
Singapore, is believed to be the most conservative in comparison to existing members of
the Malayo-Portuguese branch of the Lusoasian group which MPC belongs to. The
conservativeness of the MPC is linked to how it has been out of contact with metropolitan
Portuguese for over four centuries though it is pointed out that the non-Portuguese-
derived lexical content of MPC is comparatively small.
13
After the takeover of Malacca by the Portuguese, the earlier form of MPC would
have received considerable influence from (i) the pre-existing lingua franca, Bazaar
Malay, (ii) other local languages that stood out in the pool of features for selection, and
(iii) Portuguese-based contact varieties from other Portuguese colonies might have been
present to some extent among the crews, labourers and other personnel, as demonstrated
by the linguistic typology of MPC in Baxter (1996). The second-language Portuguese-
based varieties provided the main input to the learning of this local contact Portuguese
variety that would become the first language to many generations in this part of South
East Asia, along with the weakening of ties and access to European Portuguese models
(Baxter, 1988; Baxter & Silva, 2004).
There have been some proposals on the origin of contact languages and in
particular of some Portuguese-based contact languages, which can be directly or
indirectly related to the case of MPC and MPC-speaking group. These proposals have
either viewed contact languages as having emerged in particular exceptional
environments (Bickerton, 1988) or as the outcome of sociological or socio-historical
phenomena (Ansaldo, 2009; Muysken, 1988; Mufwene, 2001, 2013). Proposals related
to contact Portuguese varieties like MPC usually revolve around the process of
creolisation and the exceptional environments in which contact varieties are formed
(Baxter, 1988, 1996). The different opinions in the treatment of contact languages, though
it is noted that different proposals may be still valid and evolving to their fellow followers,
have changed how contact languages are perceived by researchers, the social world and
contact-language-speaking group members themselves, either directly or indirectly. The
status of contact languages as languages has come to be recognised following
epistemological shifts and findings in more language contact situation studies, especially
language contact and language change.
14
It is not the purpose of this thesis to elaborate and make a stand on the genesis and
formation of MPC. However, the treatment of contact languages is crucial to
understanding and advancing in language ecology, language evolution and in planning
any language or culture efforts. The advance in understanding contact languages has lent
some important insights to this thesis. Aligning this thesis with new insights from the
literature by no means underscores and demeans any previous work done on MPC.
Rather, as with most academic works, this thesis builds on previous research while in
search of new perspectives to look at the language and group in study based on data and
literature. This thesis draws upon Ansaldo (2009)’s work in the hope of providing new
insights on the language and group in study. Perhaps what makes Ansaldo (2009)’s
proposal in contact language formation much relevant to the case in study is the focus on
motivation behind contact language formation, namely identity and multiple alignment.
The focus on motivation in this thesis as will be seen in Chapter 6 and 7 as emerged in
the research process is parallel with the focus on motivation in Ansaldo’s work. Based on
how in most contact settings, features transfer from the input varieties to the new grammar
through various stages of adaptation and not directly from the source to the product,
Ansaldo argues against the presence of a pidgin form prior to the formation of contact
languages of his study, Sri Lankan Malay, Baba Malay and Makista. Despite how one’s
proposal about the origin and nature of a contact language may be, it is at least recognised
among scholars including Baxter (1988, 1996), Ansaldo (2009), Mufwene (2001, 2003,
2013) and Siegel (1997, 1999) that contact languages are languages formed between
varieties of languages used for inter-groups’ communication in the ecology.
If one starts to reject exceptionalism in studying contact languages, as in accepting
that the formation of a contact language is a natural outcome of multilingual environments
in which languages are learned in informal contexts as Ansaldo (2009) puts forward, the
multilingual matrix and ecology in which a contact language is formed and continues to
15
evolve can be better embraced. Ansaldo contends that altered or innovative replication is
the norm in multilingual, informal transmission and cautions against a monogenetic,
linear view of language evolution. Although intermarriages play a significant role in
language contact situations, it is reminded that contact outside the household and societal
multilingualism is reminded to be recognised as a force behind the evolution of new
varieties.
To pave the way leading to understanding the micro processes that are presented
and discussed in Chapter 6 and 7, this chapter has been written with a focus on: (i) the
general development of MPC and (ii) the ideologies brought about throughout the
different periods (the interacting and accumulating ideologies and contemporary ones will
be discussed in Chapter 6 and 7) following the change in power and policies. What the
people in the present study were experiencing socially, politically, economically and
culturally are introduced in the following sections following periodisation:
i. pre-colonial,
ii. colonial in which Malacca was taken over by the Portuguese in 1511, by the
Dutch in 1640 and subsequently by the British temporarily between 1795
and 1818 and then from 1824 as part of the Straits Settlement with Penang
and Singapore before the British administration of Malacca as part of the
Federation of Malaya lasting till independence in 1957,
iii. post-colonial
This chapter does not delve deeply into the origin, nature and form of MPC, but
concentrates instead on the interaction between socio-historical and political events and
the circumstances of these events as brought upon the development of MPC and the
ideologies revolving around MPC and people identifying with a MPC-speaking heritage.
16
2.2 The Pre-colonial Period
In the context of Malacca as an international port and trade centre under the Malay
sultanate rule, prior to the takeover by the Portuguese in 1511, the lingua franca of the
multi-ethnic community in Malacca (consisting of, among others, the Malays, Gujaratis,
Parsis, Bengalis, Arabs, Javanese, Chinese and Tamils) was Bazaar Malay, a pidginised
form of Malay (Baxter, 1988; Thomaz, 2000). In the background of a diverse pool of
languages as Malacca was a busy trade entreport, as many as 84 languages were claimed
by Tomé Pires (1944, cited here from Baxter, 1988: 3) to have been spoken at the port.
Pre-colonial language ideology took the form of reciprocal multilingualism, as
gathered from oral historical records and other descriptions on precolonial Melanesian
contexts although pre-colonial records are little, the vernaculars co-existed in a non-
hierarchical relationship (Jourdan & Angeli, 2014, who also cite from Kulick, 1992 and
Sankoff, 1980). Jourdan and Angeli (2014) employ the term reciprocal multilingualism
to refer to a mutually understood system in which all vernacular languages occupied an
equal position in linguistic exchange and were learnt by neighbouring groups in the pre-
colonial period. Multilingual competence was highly valued, though individuals’
multilingual competence might vary, as political power was obtained by individuals who
were good orators.
The implications of reciprocal multilingualism are an openness to other cultures
and languages. The benefits of reciprocal multilingualism are found to be social and can
be seen as respect and goodwill in establishing friendly relationships; people speaking
vernacular languages are found to be proud of their linguistic competence. Similarly,
Ansaldo (2009) also recognises individual and societal multilingualism in the pre-colonial
times in diverse ecologies in South East Asia.
17
2.3 The Colonial Period
In the biography of the Malacca Portuguese community, citing work from Freyre
(1961) and Texeira (n.d.), Sta Maria (1982: 6) presents the chronical development of the
people to develop a deeper understanding of his community and in the hope of “… if in
writing this book, interest could be aroused, among my colleagues and others, to delve
deeper into Malacca’s antiquity and publish more books on our past glories”. In the book,
his people are described as:
As a consequence of these processes of luzo-tropical civilisation, the process of

miscengenation and the adaptation of tropical values we find in lands where the
Portuguese had colonised, a community comprising of Portuguese descendants
that had emerged either through intermarriage or conversion. A people that is
christo-centric in character and not a people identifiable or classified according to
their pigmentation; their descendants evolved to be less ethnic-conscious.
(Sta Maria, 1982: 17)
Sta Maria took the liberty to refer to the people of his own as Malacca Portuguese,
due to the absence of a precise terminology, explaining that it is common to hear
references such as Malaysian Chinese and Malaysian Indians for they could not have
been referred to in the same manner as how Portuguese descendants in Goa are called
Goanese and Macaunese in Macau, because of differences in social context and fabric.
Sta Maria also raises awareness on the proliferation of identity that had resulted in today’s
absence of an identity consensus, pointing to references applied to describe the
descendants of the Portuguese, including the earliest mestizos said to be a general term
used to describe all Portuguese descendants in places where Iberians Portuguese had
fathered or mothered children with the local inhabitants, and topazese which refers to
mestizos of the Orient (Malacca) (Baxter, 1988; Thomaz, 2000).
The heterogeneity of the population of Malacca is given an overview in Thomaz
(2000), consisting of passages originally submitted as a thesis in 1964, based on
Portuguese documents. In the sixteenth century, the Malays, or also considered the
18
indigenous, were the most numerous while the Tamils made up the most important group
of the non-indigenous population of Malacca back then. Other important groups were the
Gujaratis, Bengalis, Javanese, Luzonites (people from islands which later became the
Philippine islands) and Chinese while the Peguans and Jews were present but in a small
number. The Portuguese who are said to have formed the last element of the Malacca
population were the last to arrive but “were the lords of the place” (Thomaz, 2000: 81),
as the first who arrived in Malacca came in the service of the King, serving in one
Portuguese fortress for limited periods before another and being paid by the Royal
Exchequer. The heterogeneity of the population of Malacca is pointed out by Thomaz as
a possible factor of how the Portuguese had captured Malacca as not all were loyal to the
Malacca Sultan.
The heterogeneity of the people who entered and eventually settled in Malacca
via the Portuguese ships that arrived in the 16th century is also captured in historical
records, as examined in the literature, specifically relevant to the present case in Malacca
are Baxter (1988, 1996, 2005), Hancock (1969, 1975, 2009, 2015) and Thomaz (2000)
who have examined Portuguese documents, as discussed directly thus far or indirectly in
the discussion on the pool of language resources and features that were in the picture.
Such heterogeneity is also discussed in other works that refer to the Portuguese colonial
times such as in Heins (1975). Though not specifically dealing with the case of Malacca,
works such as Cardoso (2014) shows that there could be a considerable degree of
sociolinguistic variation in the Indo-Portuguese communities even when it is not recorded
in available resources; Cardoso reminds that failing to take into consideration
sociolinguistic variation of the communities may compromise the validity of linguistic
studies.
During the Dutch period, the population speaking the Portuguese-based variety,
which would have been the first language for at least two generations of people
19
identifying with Portuguese racial and cultural identity out of the 130 years under
Portuguese control, was reduced as they moved or were transported to other places.
However, the MPC-speaking group at this stage is said to have constituted the largest
linguistic group in the town as Bazaar Malay and MPC continued as the alternating lingua
franca of Malacca (Baxter, 2012; Baxter & Silva, 2004). 1469 persons of Portuguese-
descent racial and cultural identity are listed in the census of 1678 (Bort, 1927[1678]: 39-
44, cited here from Baxter & Silva, 2004: viii), and these people would have spoken the
earlier Portuguese-based contact language. One fundamental factor of survival of MPC
after the Portuguese period, according to Baxter (2012), is a bond between MPC and
Roman Catholicism, through the Dutch and British period. Until the recent decades, the
bond between language and religion was maintained via the Irmang di Greze, ‘brothers
of the Church’, by maintaining Catholicism for the Portuguese descendant and/or
Catholic population during the periods of prohibition, and by sending Portuguese-
speaking priests which is said to be intermittently present in the late 17th century and
permanent after 1610, through the Portuguese mission (Baxter, 2005, 2012).
Roman Catholicism which provided a strong cultural focus facilitating the
maintenance of MPC was represented by Portuguese-speaking priests of Macanese,
Goanese and Portuguese origins. Baxter (2005, 2012) states that the traditional name of
MPC, Kristang, underlies this dynamic syncretism. As introduced earlier, Kristang refers
to MPC, Christian religion and the ethnicity of people identifying with a MPC-speaking
heritage, having derived from the Portuguese word Cristão, ‘Christian’. The historical
accounts show that the earliest reference of the term Kristang (or Cristao in the original
Portuguese text) in a scholarly text appears to be that of Teixeria (1963: 23), which
records the Portuguese mission in Malacca and Singapore from 1511 to 1958:
20
These Eurasians who are not subjects of Portugal speak Cristao i.e. Portuguese
patois because in these lands Cristao is synonymous with Portuguese… there are
still several thousands of Eurasians who speak the patois or Cristao which our
nationals understand without difficulty…
(Teixeria, 1963: 23)
The Portuguese period planted the seeds of the elements that would make up the
people who identified with a MPC-speaking heritage and by the end of the Portuguese
period, the people had become more diversified compared to the start of the Portuguese
period. The Dutch period saw the growing diversity of the people through marriages
between Dutch or Dutch-descents with Portuguese-descents. How Portuguese-descents
were treated during the Dutch period is described in some accounts while referring to
Portuguese documents and Portuguese’s works. Either this aspect is mildly reported (e.g.
subtle policies that led to social and religious suppression were reported in Sta Maria,
1982) or the harsh treatment of the Portuguese-descents and persecution against their
religion are recalled (Fernandis, 2000, 2003) or observed (Sarkissian, 2000).
Based on historical records and Malaccan church documents, De Witt (2012)
reports from another perspective. Although the Dutch period is commonly labelled by the
historical and religious indifferences, between the Dutch and Portuguese powers, and
between the Dutch Protestant and Roman Catholic, persecution and discrimination were
not total and focused against the Portuguese descendants. Some were observed to have
enjoyed economic gains and certain status. After the Dutch took over Malacca, according
to De Witt (2012), three levels of Dutch assimilation exist:
i. a group’s full assimilation into the Malacca Portuguese-Eurasian
community and embracing of culture and heritage (e.g. those residing in PS
or having close relatives in PS),
ii. another group adopting the Portuguese-Eurasian culture as their own while
being aware of their Dutch heritage,
21
iii. a third group holding fast to their Dutch heritage with minimum assimilation
into the Portuguese-Eurasian community.
After the British takeover, the population identifying with Portuguese ancestry
and MPC continued to reduce; the 1827 census (Dickinson, 1940: 260-261, here from
Baxter, 1988: 8) records that “[t]he inhabitants that come next under consideration are the
Siranies or native Portuguese” and “these are remains of the once large population of
Malacca who are now dwindled to no more than 2,289 souls”. In 1933, the PS or Padri
sa Chang, ‘Priest’s village’, was established and its existence is credited to have
contributed, thus far, to the survival of the Malacca Portuguese Eurasians’ culture and
native language (Baxter, 2005: 15). Prior to 1957, Portuguese descendants who were
resettled in the Portuguese Settlement are associated with being fishermen and less well-
off compared to the other Malaccan Portuguese Eurasians who were named the upper ten.
As reported by Baxter’s elderly respondents, priests prior to the Second World War
(during British colonial period) who were resident in Malacca were fluent speakers of
MPC. These priests would have had exposure to Asian varieties of Portuguese-based
contact languages and were trained in the seminaries of Goa and Macau.
The pre-colonial ideology of reciprocal multilingualism did not disappear
following different European power takeovers of Malacca due to the nature of contact
between mixed groups still being in existence: it is ingrained in the ideologies of what
makes a multilingual society. Similar to what Jourdan and Angeli (2014) have found in
the Honiara context, the social benefits and pride of being multilingual are also observed
in the PS context. The benefits of being multilingual are also extended to business as the
PS is known to be tourist attraction in Malacca which became a UNESCO World Heritage
Site in 2008.
As Jourdan and Angeli point out, a profoundly different linguistic order is brought
about by colonisation. In their Honiara research context, English is placed at the top of
22
the order. Colonial labels were used to reinforce a linguistic hierarchy to distinguish the
local populations from the colonials and implied the coloniser’s language ideologies.
These include a strong bias in favour of literacy (e.g. true languages are necessarily
written languages) and linguistic purism deprecating syncretic linguistic practices and
equating language change with decay (e.g. the constant comparison between the more
prestigious lexifier language and the hybrid language) (Jourdan & Angeli, 2014).
The hierarchical multilingualism in the Malacca Straits context underwent more
than one major restructuring of the linguistic order as Malacca was occupied by the
Portuguese, Dutch, British, and, for a brief period (between 1942-1945), the Japanese.
MPC developed and was used as a lingua franca alongside Bazaar Malay until before the
British period. Under different administrations, the target languages to be learned were
different following the languages of the more powerful, prestigious and dominant. The
period of British colonisation left remarkable traces in administration and education. In
the post-independence era, English was still predominantly used despite Malay being the
national language. Since the late 1960s, with the gradual replacement of English language
as a medium of instruction in public schools and institutions of higher education, the
linguistic landscape of the country began to shift. Pillai and Khan (2011) demonstrate
how MPC-speaking group members outside the PS recalled their parents or families
making conscious decisions in switching to the use of English as the first language, in
place of MPC, for utilitarian reasons.
Language myths related to MPC are discussed in Baxter (2012). These language
myths could not have been separated from the colonial language ideologies that continue
to echo in perceiving the nature and form of MPC. The first language myth pointed out
by Baxter is that MPC is perceived to be the sixteenth-century Portuguese that became
isolated after the Dutch takeover of Malacca. As a scholar who has documented MPC in
its fuller form since 1980s, Baxter has more than once pointed out that MPC is not 16th
23
century Portuguese, including in the dictionary of MPC (Baxter & De Silva, 2004).
Although the historical connection between MPC and Portuguese cannot be denied,
Baxter cautions that the language myth gives rise to a subordinate relationship between
the local language and Portuguese. The second language myth is MPC is mislearnt or
broken Portuguese. Baxter draws attention to linguistic ignorance on the part of the
observer such as early foreign travellers in the East. This second myth, again, “places the
local language in a weaker position, as a language that, if broken, could somehow be
fixed” (Baxter, 2012: 132-133). In contrast, there have been Portuguese missionaries, as
Baxter points out, who have affirmed MPC as “a worthy language in its own right”, citing
Coelho (1967 [1886]).
2.4 The Post-colonial Period, Independence and Nation Building
The new generation of MPC-speaking group members, after the Federation of
Malaya achieved Independence in 1957, is observed to be “creating a place for themselves
in the modern Malaysian nation” by using their cultural identity (Sarkissian, 2005: 168).
The unique identity of the group in study is associated with hybridised Malaysian-
Portuguese elements such as their cultural dance named branyo, their cultural costume
named sarong kebaya, imported Portuguese folk costumes, and home-grown country-
western bands; the type of music and dance for which it is now famous was introduced
into the settlement to upper-class Eurasians by a foreign priest, Fr. Manuel Joachim
Pintado, posted to the Portuguese Mission in 1948 (Sarkissian, 2000, 2005). The
introduction of European Portuguese regional folk dances in the 1950s is thought to have
far-reaching influence on the traditions of the Malacca Portuguese Eurasian community.
Baxter refers to the introduction of European Portuguese regional folk dances as “an
interesting case of innocent, yet uninformed, cultural intervention” (Baxter, 2012: 133),
24
citing Father Antόnio da Silva Rêgo’s writing. Below is a translated version by Baxter
from Rêgo and Baxter (1998: 280):
[The Portuguese folkdance group] was founded in 1951 by Fr Manuel Joaquim

Pintado. In that year, the engineer Ruy Cinatti passed through [Malacca, and]
Fr. Pintado asked him to teach some Portuguese songs… realising this a long-
held dream… Songs and dances were quickly assimilated.
Thanks to the songs… the Malacca traditional songs will undergo beneficial
influence [they will] no doubt become part of the local folklore, will be sung by
everybody with a better pronunciation, and former errors will thus be corrected.
(Baxter, 2012: 134)
Although Portuguese folklore dance was imported and integrated into MPC-
speaking group’s culture, it has since become a key identification of their cultural identity.
Cultural troupes in PS are invited for cultural performance, whether locally or in other
states or even in other countries. There are group members who perceive that the
Portuguese folklore dance is similar to that of the European Portuguese while there are
those who perceive otherwise, as observed in fieldwork and by Sarkissian (2005). Below
is an excerpt from a PS MPC-speaking group member who contributed to Pillai (2013).
A view towards identifying with the European Portuguese in terms of culture and towards
identifying with the earlier form of the present MPC speech as spoken in the 16th century
is demonstrated in this excerpt. A similar folk dance is also present in Macau, where
linguistic and cultural elements had transferred to following migration from Malacca.
Excerpt 2.1 Transcript of ELAR video recording mpc04
MPC Balu di Portugis, teng ngua tempu, ngua padri.

English Portuguese dance, there was a time, a priest.
MPC Eli sa nomi Father Pintado.

English His name was Father Pintado.
MPC Father Pintado ja beng bizitah ku nus tudu.

English Father Pintado came to visit us.
MPC Ja fikah padri grandi di greza di San Pedro.

English He became the head priest at St Peter's church.
25
MPC Mutu tantu ki Father Pintado ja da sabeh kung, nus sa jenti
di bairu di Portugis ki sorti balu, balu-balu balah di
Portugal.
English To many Father Pintado informed people at the Portuguese
village how the dances are danced in Portugal.
MPC So [English] eli ja abrasah tudu nus sa jenti.

English So he embraced all of our people.
MPC Mutu tantu jenti ja prendeh eli ja falah ki so ti.

English Many of our people have learnt. he had said how.
MPC Mas akeli balu ki nus ta balah retu balu na Portugis.

English Most of the dances that we are dancing are correct
Portuguese dances.
MPC Mas eli sa bersu, kantiga kantiga palabra palabra di
Portugis di Malaka.
English But their music, songs, lyrics are Malacca Portuguese.
MPC Kinzi onzi sa tempu.

English The time of fifteen eleven.
MPC Nus na Ropianu falah er.. antik Portugis.

English Our in European say er.. antique Portuguese.
(Overee, 2013)
According to Bartens (2005), the strong emphasis on Islamic and the Asian nature
of Malaysia society after the independence of the Federation of Malaya in 1957 resulted
in the marginalisation of Portuguese Eurasians. Whilst O’Neilll (2008: 63-76) expresses
his hesitation at identifying “any original Kristang identity” since it is likely to have
undergone transformations since the 16th century, the new generation of post-
independent Portuguese Eurasians, found a place for themselves by using their cultural
identity (Baxter, 2012; Sarkissian, 2000, 2005).
Post-colonial societies undergo restructuring to balance or replace the former
colonial influences but the colonial language remains relevant especially when the
colonial language is English, the global or international language. In the Honiara context,
Jourdan and Angeli observe the awareness of the value of English as the language with
26
linguistic and social capital on a global market. Similar to the Honiara context, English
in Malaysia has remained the language of social advancement. The sociolinguistic setting
of Malaysian English began to develop during the British colonisation which was from
the late eighteenth century until the mid-twentieth centuries (Lowenberg, 1993). The
census of 1921 shows that based on the ability to read and write a letter, from the fifteen
towns in the Straits Settlements and Federated Malay states, 61,862 out of the total
population of the towns which is 743,126 were able to speak English (here from Lee &
Tan, 2000).
Jourdan and Angeli note how, in the Pijin speakers’ perceptions, the superiority
of English is now generally attributed to its greater instrumental value at the global level
in terms of university education and job opportunities, rather than to its intrinsic qualities
or to the prestigious status of its speakers. A similar trend is observed among the PS
respondents, seeing how English mastery has helped secure jobs in various industries that
require English speaking such as in the hospitality and service line. The linguistic
currency of English is implied if not directly uttered by research participants from
different generation groups.
2.5 Education and Minority Groups in the 20th Century
Similar to other postcolonial and multilingual nations, indigenous and minority
languages struggle to survive in Malaysia, amidst the use of dominant local languages,
such as Malay and Chinese dialects, as well as English. Malay or Bahasa Malaysia is the
national language, while English is used widely in business, media, and private education.
The Malaysian Constitution states that “no person shall be prohibited or prevented from
using (otherwise than for official purposes), or from teaching or learning, any other
language” (Federal Constitution Malaysia, Article 152). As it follows, Mandarin and
Tamil medium primary schools continue to exist, and local media broadcasts and
27
publishes in Chinese (mainly Mandarin) and Tamil apart from in Malay and English.
However, a selection process common to multilingual contexts occurs over time, as some
languages begin to take precedence over others in various domains such as the home. The
multitude of reasons for this have been discussed in studies on language shift in different
communities in Malaysia, such as the dwindling number of speakers, intermarriage,
education, social mobility, urbanisation and the economic and social value of a language
(e.g. David, 1998; Kijai, Lampadan & Loo, 2010; Ting & Sussex, 2002).
The National Language Policy, including the use of teaching and learning of other
languages apart from Malay, is enshrined in the Constitution (Article 152) as language
planning began in 1956 (Omar, 1982) to prepare for Malaysia’s independence in 1957.
Malay, Bazaar Malay throughout the pre-colonial, colonial and post-colonial periods, and
Standard Malay post-language planning acquiring formal status and use, remains “the
lingua franca in intergroup communication” in Malaysia (Omar, 1987: 58). Prior to
independence, Malay, Chinese, Tamil, and English were used in public notices and
important documents under the British rule though English was the language of the
government. After Malaysia became independent in 1957, Omar (1982: 33) describes
how “people speaking a common language acquire through this [Malay] language a
feeling of unity and a common identity”. The emphasis on English education during the
British administration and the decade after independence, followed by the increased use
of Malay in the public sector and education were partly responsible for indigenous and
the heritage languages of minority communities, such as the Portuguese Eurasians being
marginalised. After Independence, Malay, the national language also became the medium
of instruction in 1980 except for Chinese and Indian primary schools and Chinese-
medium secondary schools.
The National Language Policy states that pupil’s own language could be taught
in the schools if the parents desired and there were at least 15 students to make up a class.
28
Omar (1982, 1987) records that the Report of the Education Committee was concerned
with education in general and specifically the policies governing the uses of English,
Malay, Tamil and Chinese. There have been Chinese primary schools since 1904 and
Tamil primary schools since 1913.
In Peninsular Malaysia where there are 18 indigenous groups, with a government
department catering for the indigenous people’s welfare, government initiative has
recently been seen in the Semai Language Project. In East Malaysia where indigenous
languages are more numerous, documentation has been in progress with the initiation of
bodies and groups such as the SIL International, a language development non-profit
organisation (see works such as Quankenbush, 2007). In Sabah, languages such as
Timugon Murut, Kimaragan, Tombonuwo and others have books published by the Sabah
State Museum, some dating from 1979 (Smith, 2003). In Sarawak, the presence of a local
university with departments offering courses such as Human Language Technology for
Indigenous Languages and organising conferences for indigenous languages has certainly
brought more attention and interest to indigenous languages. Similar to other languages
that have been included as school curriculum everywhere in the world, most of the
minority languages that are taught in school in Malaysia are those with a bigger
population size. In some cases, these minority languages are considered a regional lingua
franca for communication between ethnic groups, namely Semai in Peninsular Malaysia,
Iban in Sarawak, and Kadazandusun in Sabah. In Smith’s personal communication with
the then Minister of Education, population number, practicality and affordability are three
factors considered when planning pupil’s own language.
How policy is implemented such as what age indigenous languages are introduced
in school conveys messages about the policy-maker. Kadazandusun programme begins
in Grades 4-6 with plans to continue into the secondary school while Semai is introduced
in Grades 3-6, the reason being the children need to learn their national language, Malay,
29
well first and not be burdened with more than one language, as reported by Smith (2003).
A rather typical top-down perspective is evident in such policy implementation,
overlooking the benefits of bi- and multilingualism education. Smith proposes
considering additive bilingualism (Lambert, 1975), in contrary to the present subtractive
bilingualism trend for implementing pupil’s own language policy in Malaysia.
2.6 Present Trends of Language Shift
The UNESCO Atlas of the World’s Languages in Danger records a total of 26
languages in danger in Malaysia (Moseley, 2010); MPC is one of them. MPC today is
estimated to be spoken fluently by between a half and one third of the overall population
of the Malacca Portuguese Eurasians in Portuguese Settlement which is around 2000
people and they are mainly over 40 years old; elderly MPC mother-tongue speakers are
few (see extrapolation by Baxter, 2005:16, based on his personal communication with
Lee and Lee’s self-report survey, 2004).
In the PS, English is now used by most age groups and is especially dominant in
the family and friendship domains in the community, especially so among the younger
generation (Baxter, 2005; Pillai, Soh & Kajita, 2014). The process of language shift from
MPC to English among the MPC-speaking group members in Malacca is observed to
have taken place within less than half a century. English became the language most widely
spoken by group members when the members of the community sought employment in
clerical and auxiliary positions in British colonial society during mid-19th Century
(Baxter, 2005). In addition to that, the growing network of schools in Malacca during the
19th century and as well as the community’s perception towards English as a prestige
language further contributed to the shift towards English especially among the Portuguese
Eurasian middle class (Baxter, 2005; Platt & Weber, 1980, 1983). Rapid socioeconomic
change during the second half of the 20th Century coupled with natural demographic
30
change continued to encourage the language shift towards English among the MPC
speech community members (Baxter, 2005). In Pillai and Khan (2011), the MPC-
speaking group members outside the PS established a particular link between them being
minority community members and choosing English as their first language: all
respondents claimed that English is their language and the major reason behind this can
be traced to utilitarian attitudes and reasons.
The decline in use of MPC has been associated with a mix of different reasons.
Based on Nunes (1996), David and Noor (1999), Sudesh (2000) and Lee (2004), Baxter
(2012) compiles five factors that are linked to the shrinkage in MPC use: generational
loss, fluency, language status, core domain loss and intermarriage with other ethnic
groups. Lee (2011) conclude that economic concerns and competing priorities are the
reasons behind the decreased use of MPC, due to the change from an originally cordial,
non-threatening relationship to a power imbalance between the ruling and minority
groups after Malaysia achieved independence in 1957. These economic concerns and
competing priorities include Malay fluency (a criterion in government service and
education), the bumiputera policy (‘the land of the soil’s policy’), land issue and the
advantage of English fluency in job opportunities. These concerns and competing
priorities lead to language shift. Macro variables including socio-historical background,
socio-cultural values, and socio-political dynamics of minority-majority group relations
in the country are found to have a bearing on the micro-variables of community’s attitude
and language behaviour towards the language shift situation, as reported by Lee (2011).
The survival of MPC, in contrast, has been accredited to three main factors, as Baxter
(2012) reports:
i. linguistic reinforcement through a dynamic association of Roman
Catholicism, language and quasi-ethnic group,
31
ii. the development of a common socioeconomic base in the poorer core
community until the twentieth century,
iii. population dynamics.
Although the number of speakers of MPC has declined over the years (e.g. Nunes,
1996; David & Noor, 1999; Sudesh, 2000), the feasibility of revitalisation of MPC has
been discussed (see Baxter, 2005, 2012; Nunes, 1996). Related discussions will be
revisited in Chapter 7. Studies related to language maintenance, language shift and
language attitudes are found in works such as David and Noor (1998), Sudesh (2000),
and Lee (2011). A significant finding from the past research is that the positive attitudes
towards MPC are not always matched with group members’ actual language use (Lee,
2011; Pillai, Soh & Kajita, 2014; Sudesh, 2000). Findings like this inform us about the
potential challenges and concerns to be examined in language revitalisation. Some other
findings and interpretations of findings related to MPC and MPC-speaking group
members drew attention to the relationship between MPC and MPC-speaking group and
how this relationship is considered. In the conclusion, Maros et al (2014: 281) write that
the PS younger generation:
…seem to have a lack of appreciation towards their ancestral roots and this
affects their usage of PK. The finding and discussion of the paper have also
pointed that the usage is affected by mix-marriage, migration and lack of
standardization. As a result, the use of PK (Papia Kristang, MPC) became more
and more meaningless (my emphasis) and hence endangered now.
Maros et al base their conclusion on observation and interviews in two visits to
the PS while drawing heavily on the ethnolinguistic vitality framework. What are reported
in their work have been reported in earlier studies (e.g. David & Noor, 1999; Nunes,
1996), namely the language shift. However, to say a language has become more
meaningless (i.e. “more and more meaningless” in the excerpt) is in many ways
oversimplifying the complex make-up and historical development of the language and
32
people who speak it. In view of interpretation of findings related to MPC and PS MPC-
speaking group members such as the excerpt above, it justifies that a more holistic
approach is in need to approach how minority group members make sense of their present
situations in relation to their heritage language, to understand the conceptions and
conceptualisations of minority groups’ experiences and expressivity. The present study
argues that wider contexts, including socio-historical and political development, need to
be considered in approaching the present linguistic circumstances.
Over the years, the awareness of the decline of MPC has been heightened.
However, such awareness may not be translated into actions which may be similar to
other cases of endangered language. Language policies in the homes of MPC speakers
were examined in relation to the extent to which MPC is being transferred to younger
family members prior to the data collection for this research (Pillai, Soh & Kajita, 2014).
One of the key drivers for maintaining the use of a heritage language is known to be its
use in the family domain (e.g. Fishman, 1991; Spolsky, 2004; Schwartz, 2008). The loss
of natural intergenerational transmission among (i) the first generation of immigrants, (ii)
the second generation (who grew up bilingual), and (iii) the third generation (who were
commonly monolingual in the dominant local language with some knowledge of the
heritage language, if any), was identified as a key marker of language loss (Fishman,
1965).
In consistence with previous studies (e.g. David & Noor, 1999), the older speakers
were found to be more fluent in MPC compared to the younger ones. This is despite the
fact that they considered themselves as native speakers of MPC, as the younger generation
were found to have used predominantly English. Although older members of the family
continue to use MPC, their children and grandchildren generally respond in English. The
general sense of MPC being an ethnic and cultural identity marker for the Portuguese
Eurasians is not translated into the transmission of the language in the family domain.
33
Thus, in the majority of homes in the Settlement, it is more common to hear a mix of
English and MPC being used. MPC continues to exist in the family domain where there
are still fluent older speakers, be they parents or grandparents, as seen in the five families
studied in our case. However, the passing of the older generation will inevitably change
the dynamics, especially if parents do not consciously insist on MPC being used at home.
As family language policy is about “choice” (Spolsky, 2005: 2160), the use of MPC as a
home language, similar to other minority languages, is influenced by socio-economic
level of the families as families that are better educated or are economically better off
may already be using more English for utilitarian purposes (Baxter, 2005). The socio-
economic bearing on the continuous use of a language is also discussed by May (2003)
and Mufwene (2003).
Although the recent decades have seen some revitalisation efforts of the language
in study, it is unclear if the agenda and goals of the revitalisation of MPC have been
identified and discussed. Similar to the case of Quechua revitalisation, King (2001: 203)
observes that “despite extensive talk of the desire to revitalize… there are no explicit
agendas for language revitalisation, and little agreement upon priorities or goals for doing
so…there are no widely known goals or agendas concerning how this might come about
through collective action”. It is high time an investigation was conducted on the MPC
revitalisation efforts and reactions towards the efforts.
2.7 Concluding Thoughts
The interaction between socio-historical and political development, and the
development of MPC and people identifying with a MPC-speaking heritage throughout
the pre-colonisation, colonisation, post-independence periods, and up to the present
introduced in this chapter lay the foundation for an ethnicity that would become the
present group of people identifying with a MPC-speaking heritage, and the social,
34
political and cultural circumstance that still and will echo. The marginalisation and
stigmatisation of a contact language is fundamentally built up by the change in power and
policies, echoed by social, political, and economic disadvantages leading to the
subordinated situation for people who have no connection and rights to a certain land or
territory, unlike the dominant groups (powerful ruling groups) and the indigenous people
(e.g. Maoris), though land and minority rights continue to be struggles and issues between
the minority and majority groups. The present literature review justifies (i) the complex
social, historical and political make-up of the group in study and (ii) the need of an
approach to seek and understand minority group members’ experiences, expressivity and
dynamics from their perspectives. The next chapter looks at major concepts this thesis is
built upon, paving the way to understanding how these major concepts provide the
theoretical lens for approaching and understanding the case in study.
35
CHAPTER 3: MAJOR CONCEPTS
3.1 Introduction
Written in retrospect, as consistent with a bottom-up Constructivist Grounded
Theory approach, this chapter presents the major concepts drawn from interrelated fields
in search of ways of conceptualising the relationships between the concepts and
categories that emerged in the research process. To string the interdisciplinary concepts
together as a coherent framework, at the core of the string, there are three dimensions:
discourses, ideologies and identities, as shown in Figure 3.1. The three dimensions are
connected via:
i. the construction of language- and heritage-related experience as a part of
social life, namely language endangerment and language revitalisation, in
discourses (though not limited to only verbal discourses) in response to a
wider process of social, cultural and political development,
ii. the relationship between mutually constitutive discourses, ideologies and
identities,
iii. the social basis and political power contributing to the constructedness of
the language in study and of the experience of the people in study, bearing
in mind that the representation of an aspect of social life and ideologies via
discourses has to be understood against the power relations in the wider
context.
36
Shifts (historical, political, social)
Discourses
Identities
Ideologies
Shifts (global, epistemological)
Figure 3.1: Theoretical framework
These interrelated dimensions and layers are discussed in the following sections.
Relevant global and epistemological shifts and trends that have been encouraging for the
fields of language endangerment and revitalisation are drawn upon. How these shifts
interact with local, political and social shifts then provide insights on the construction of
self, group, and realities. The critique towards relevant literature have been most useful
as a reminder to be aware of the traps a researcher may fall into, particularly language
essentialism though the connection between language and identity is recognised, or for
fear of being not well-considered enough between the wider context and micro-processes.
3.2 Language and Discourses
Initially, this research started with exploring how language is used to talk about
language and heritage. As the research progressed, the connection of language to other
37
dimensions, namely identities and ideologies, had to be conceptualised eventually. This
research did not set out to analyse linguistic, structural and pragmatic components of a
group of people’s account on an aspect of their social life in relation to their endangered
heritage language and language revitalisation. Rather, “language is a central topic, a
motif, a target, in which language ideologies are being articulated, formed, amended,
enforced” (Blommaert, 1999: 1). The present study draws from linguistic anthropology
on the concept of language, identities and ideologies. Approaching language as a means
to understand other types of structures, the present study follows the definitions of
language as “a set of cultural practices”, and “a set of symbolic resources that enter the
constitution of social fabric and the individual representation of actual or possible
worlds,” while language speakers are social actors (Duranti, 1997: 3). This research looks
at how language is used to construct and shape speakers’ worlds, in particular, to
conceptualise and represent an aspect of social life in study in view of language
revitalisation. Perceiving worlds and reality as constructed, fluid, and multiple underpins
the need to recognise the role of speakers as active and creative participants or actors in
social interaction (Duranti, 1997). By recognising the fluidity and complexity of
ideologies as expressing part of a social aspect and identities in discourses, the interplay
between language, ideologies, and identities can be better conceptualised and something
tangible can be proposed if group members would like to do so.
In linguistic anthropology, language and linguistic practices are approached as
social semiotic actions, systems, processes, resources and acts of identification (Bucholtz
& Hall, 2004; Duranti, 1997). Sharing about experiences of a part of social life, as focused
on in the present study, demonstrates the semiotic renderings of life events (Ochs, 2004).
The semiotic models of communication based on Peirce (1931-1958, see also Houser &
Kloesel, 1992) are said to recognise a broad variety of sign-focused pragmatic relations
between language users, the signs themselves, and the connections between these signs
38
and the world, as Kroskrity (2004) points out and contrasts with other models (e.g.
Chomsky’s linguistic models). Such a semiotic theoretical orientation became the
foundation for ethnography of communication (Hymes, 1964, 1974; Jakobson, 1957,
1960), continuing into the late 1970s and 1980s, as seen in the emphasis on practice theory
and the agency of social actors, and inspiring earliest work in linguistic anthropological
tradition of language ideologies (e.g. Gal, 1979; Hill, 1985; Irvine, 1989). The semiotics
of language are recognised to concern not identity as a set of fixed categories but
identification as an ongoing social and political process (Bucholtz & Hall, 2004).
The study of the indexical relationship between linguistic expressions and features
of the context in which they are used contributes to the understanding of the research
topic in study. Duranti (1997) reviews how linguistic expressions are studied in different
fields and shows the importance of contextualisation in approaching how particular uses
of language might sustain, reproduce or challenge particular versions of the social order
and the notion of person (or self) that is part of that order.
3.3 Motivations, Self and Identity
Before the concepts of ideologies are looked at in the next section, it is essential
to consider the concepts of motivations, self, and identity. Identity and self construction
are considered a social phenomenon in linguistic anthropology, in line with the focus of
the field on the social and cultural aspects.
Motivation has long been studied in cognitive and psychological studies (e.g.
Baumeister & Leary, 1995; Markus & Kitayama, 1991). The study of the notion of
motivation in social studies in which social processes are concerned has also proven to
be insightful such as in language acquisition (e.g. Farman, Notriell & Dornbursch, 2012).
Motivation has also been explored in Grounded Theory studies that look at social
processes, especially but not limited to the work industry, such as health-related research
39
or industry (e.g. Madiwale, 2013; Nasrin, Soroor, Soodabeh, 2012), and the work industry
(e.g. McNickle, 2009). Recent studies on language endangerment and language
revitalisation have also started to address the initially little studies on relationship between
motivations and attitudes, or on the motivation of people involved in language
revitalisation efforts (Austin & Sallabank, 2014; Sallabank, 2013). The notion of
motivation can be manifested in individual, group or societal agency. In language contact
situations set in multilingual and postcolonial context, to understand individual and group
agency related to the MPC language revitalisation process cycle, it is necessary to
consider their motivations underlying their choices of language use and coping strategies
in managing their heritage language relevance. The concept of identity alignment or
multiple alignments in terms of cultural, political, and linguistic in multilingual settings
(Ansaldo, 2009, who also discusses acts of identity in Croft, 2003) is drawn upon in
approaching the relationship between motivations and manifestation of motivations.
Based on research on Sri Lanka Malay, Baba Malay, and Makista, Ansaldo (2009)
contends that the formation of contact languages can be approached as a process of
interacting and of negotiating linguistic identities in a new environment; these
negotiations are still ongoing but with different linguistic codes involved following
economic, cultural and political changes. The concept of alignment is discussed in
Ansaldo’s work as a more holistic approach to contact language formation. Contact
language communities are said to achieve both integration within the new context and
self-identification through cultural innovation. The notion of cultural innovation in the
case of MPC-speaking group members has been discussed in Sarkissian (1997, 2005).
Apart from language evolution and language ecology, such a view also draws on language
socialisation: language transmission is approached as acculturation involving social
participants, both adults and children, in the construction and representation of identity
throughout life.
40
Once the relevance of the concept of motivation in language contact situations is
acknowledged, the motivations behind identity alignment in multilingual context can add
to much of the understanding of the dimensions of self or identity construction: from the
language contact processes that give rise to language formation, identity alignment
processes to language revitalisation processes. Identities have come to be referred to
constructs that are attributes of situations, rather than of individuals and of groups though
the same attributes are recognised to be ethnic and cultural marker in social grouping
(Bucholtz & Hall, 2004). As more studies on endangered and minority languages suggest
the need to see bi- or multilingualism as common and that researchers need to reconsider
using language as a central category or means in marking social, ethnic or cultural groups,
a non-essentialist view of language is embraced (Austin & Peter, 2014; May, 2003, 2011).
The present study shares the view that a non-essentialist view of language that can lead
to overgeneralised notions of sameness and difference (in the sense of Bucholtz & Hall,
2004) is to be cautioned against while conceptualising the experience of the group in
study set against the multilingual and postcolonial background and approaching the
language in study as social semiotic action. That identification with a minority language
or equating language with identity can impact negatively on language efforts and
language planning due to negative associations with the language has also been
considered and cautioned (Bankston & Henry, 1998; Myhill, 1999).
3.4 Ideologies
Intertwined with the use of linguistic resources to conceptualise and represent an
aspect of social life is the consciousness and subconsciousness in expressing and
negotiating complex, shifting identities, and indexing contents of ideologies which are
constructed following the shift in social, political and historical development. The
41
concept of ideology can be traced back to Marxist approaches, sociology of knowledge,
work on hegemony by Gramsci, and French structuralism (Woolard, 1998).
Language ideologies are generally known to be “thoughts about language”
(Kroskrity, 2004: 496). Language ideologies have been used to refer to a wide range of
related components: ideas or a system of ideas, perceptions, expectations (Blommaert,
1999; Steger, 2003; Woolard, 1998). The nature of language ideologies has been
described as largely tacit, taken-for-granted (McCarty, 2011) and “the situated, partial,
and interested character of conceptions and uses of language” (Errington, 2001: 110). In
the present study, language ideologies refer to a set of conceptions and conceptualisations
about languages that accumulate, interact and can be reinterpreted as embedded within
historical, economic and socio-political contexts, reflecting beliefs and reflected in
perceptions as conveyed in discourses.
The overlaps between definitions of ideologies and other related concepts which
are sometimes used interchangeably with one another, namely attitudes, perceptions, and
beliefs have been questioned by researchers. Though there is no consensus on the
interchangeability and levels of overlaps, the present study draws on the attempt to
conceptualise the relationship between the concepts by placing them on a continuum
(Austin & Sallabank, 2014; Sallabank, 2013). Expressed attitudes can be seen as the overt
manifestations of a recognition of an implicit and perhaps partial ideology (Sallabank,
2013). Jourdan and Angeli (2014) also make a similar distinction, but it is between
perception and ideology. Perception is seen as the most visible layer as expressed in social
discourses, while ideology is the underlying line of reasoning of which speakers may not
be aware of and may not express freely. Jourdan and Angeli reason that changing
perceptions are the audible outcome of evolving weighting between ideologies, while
changing perceptions can interact with underlying ideologies and lead to partial
reinterpretation of ideologies. Austin and Sallabank (2014) and Sallabank (2013) go one
42
step further and suggest that ideologies are social manifestations of the implicit belief
system and private attitudes may closely reflect underlying ideologies though these are
harder to discover than overt ones.
The shift towards postmodern views of identity as constructed, multiple and fluid
is evident in the approaches to attitudes, perceptions and ideologies. As the suggested
relations linked to ideologies above suggest, the level of consciousness and awareness of
ideologies have come to be recognised as a key to change. After all, language
revitalisation efforts begin with the assumption that components such as attitudes,
perceptions and ideologies can shift or change (Fishman, 1991, 2001; Grenoble &
Whaley, 2006; Hinton, 2001; King, 2001) while the efforts also target at changing and
influencing behaviours. Kroskrity (2000) suggests that ideologies can be challenged or
contested if group members are more aware of their underlying ideologies. Although
language-ideological studies have held a place of its own in linguistics and
anthropological studies and the importance of prior ideological identification (Fishman,
1991) has been enforced and applied in prestige planning (Ager, 2005), the language-
ideological focus in endangered language studies has only come under the focus in the
recent years, as Sallabank (2013) observes. Austin and Sallabank (2014) contend that
studying language ideologies and beliefs provides insights on reasons for language
decline, language revival and the likely success of language revitalisation projects.
Though ideological clarification is always advised prior to language revitalisation in
guides and handbooks, researchers, and groups speaking endangered languages are
reminded that ideological clarification is complex and on-going instead of a final-end
product (Bowern, 2011; Dauenhauer & Dauenhauer, 1998; King, 2001).
Other than language-ideological aspects, the language-culture nexus is also
another aspect looked at in endangered language studies and is closely related to cultural
identities and ethnicity. Bucholtz and Hall (2004) proposes taking the essentialist view or
43
binary models of identity offered by group members as a starting point for understanding
ideological underpinnings, as taken up in this research. Fishman (1989: 399) is of the
view that language always exists in a culture matrix and “that the matrix rather than the
language is the point at which support is most needed.” In their research, Daunhauer and
Daunhauer (1998) observe how culture appears to be something put on and off and
speakers do not seem to see the connection between language use and language
transmission. Unstated beliefs and ideologies were observed to prevent language
revitalisation efforts from influencing or changing individuals’ actual language practices.
Such a mismatch between expressed positive attitudes or perceptions towards language
and actual language use have also been reported elsewhere (e.g. Baker, 1992; Sallabank,
2013), including in the case of MPC (Pillai, Soh & Satomi, 2014). Garrett, Coupland and
Williams (2003) report that complexity of domains can determine the relationship
between stated attitudes and behaviours, such as whether a long-term commitment (e.g.
language learning) or short-term adjustment (e.g. changing speech style in job interview)
is involved. Such discussions add to the knowledge of what could be more relevant and
practical in language revitalisation and language planning. However, it is reminded that
culture is a social construct and though language constitutes part of culture, it does not
constitute all of it (Duranti, 1997). The language-ideological and language-cultural
aspects are key areas to look at in language revitalisation which are discussed in the next
section, particularly in bottom-up language revitalisation efforts.
3.5 Language Revitalisation
3.5.1 Overview
As with other fields of study, many endangered language and language
revitalisation studies researchers have built on the past research (e.g. Dorian, 1982;
Fishman, 1991) and developed frameworks, theories or guidelines as it is recognised that
44
every revitalisation effort is unique since every language or its speech community is
unique. The following extracts show the recognition that every language situation or
speech community is unique:
The goals of a language revitalisation program must depend on the situation in

which the language finds itself.
(Hinton, 2001: 5)
It is tempting for anyone who is starting to work on language revitalisation to try

to look for that one single program that works in every situation; in reality, every
individual community is unique.
(Grenoble & Whaley, 2006: 21)
Designations and definitions of language efforts may differ too. As noted by King
(2001: 25), although the following terms may not have been used consistently in the
literature, they are often used interchangeably: language revival (e.g. Dorian, 1994: 481),
language revitalisation (e.g. King, 2001; Hinton & Hale, 2001; Grenoble & Whaley,
2006), language shift reversal (coined as RLS, Reversing Language Shift, by Fishman,
1991), and language renewal (e.g. Otto, 1982; in Brandt & Ayoungman, 1989: 43, both
cited here are from King, 2001: 25).
These terms differ from each other in some ways. Language revival is usually,
though not consistently and necessarily, used in situation where a language has lost its
last speaker (e.g. Dorian, 1998), while language renewal is an “organised adult effort”
aimed at ensuring a declining language is spoken by at least some of the group members
(Otto, 1982; in Brandt & Ayoungman, 1989: 43, both here from King, 2001:25). The
differences between language revitalisation and Fishman’s Reversing Language Shift lie
in the focuses, as King (2001: 24) points out: language revitalisation efforts do not
necessarily focus on the reinstatement of mother-tongue transmission as prioritized in
Reversing Language Shift, “but rather, as the definition suggests, attempt to promote new
uses of the language and to increase the number of users of the language, often expanding
it to new domain”.
45
Definitions of language revitalisation may involve:
i. increasing the number of speakers such as “…the goals of revitalisation is
to increase the relative number of speakers of a language and to extend the
domains where it is employed” (Grenoble & Whaley, 2006: 13), and
“…with the aim of increasing its uses or users’ (King, 2001: 23),
ii. extending the domains of language use such as King (2001: 23) who defines
language revitalisation as “the attempt to add new linguistic forms or social
functions to an embattled minority language…,” and Paulston et al.’s
definition of “Imparting new vigor to a language still in limited use…”
(1993: 276, here from King, 2001: 25),
iii. changing or reversing, among others, attitudes, perceptions, ideologies,
political mobility, and policies such as “speakers’ attitudes” and “counter-
balancing the forces which have caused or are causing language shift”
(Grenoble & Whaley, 2006: 13, 21), or “Assistance to speech communities
whose native languages are threatened because their intergenerational
continuity is proceeding negatively with fewer and fewer users or uses every
generation” (Fishman, 1991: 1).
Hinton (2001: 5), however, uses language revitalisation in a very broad sense
since the goals of a language revitalisation program depend on each individual language
situation. She describes how language revitalisation may mean “re-establishing a
language which has ceased being the language of communication in the speech
community and bringing it back into full use in all walks of life” in the most extreme case
(in terms of the extent of its loss), while in a less extreme cases, it may mean turning the
decline of a language around. In the present study, language revitalisation is used in a
46
broad sense, similar to Hinton (2001) and also King (2001) who proposes that language
revitalisation has a broader scope than Fishman’s Reversing Language Shift.
The interest in minority languages studies including endangerment and especially
revitalisation cannot be isolated from the global and epistemological shift towards the
recognition of minority groups’ rights, including language rights. Such a shift is in line
with the shift towards integrating language ecology or an ecological approach in language
revitalisation and language planning (Hornberger, 2002; Mühlhäusler, 2000; Wendel &
Heinrich, 2012). Integrating language ecology into their framework, Wendel and
Heinrich (2012) propose that two issues are at the heart of change in language ecologies:
(i) the changing socio-economic basis of language ecologies and (ii) the relations of
domination and inequality in contact between communities, i.e. the power-differentials
resulting from different socio-economic types of organisation. Two fundamental
scenarios for endangered language communities are said to be possible. The first
opposition is to strive for more equality and seek liberation from coercion and ideological
dominance; language maintenance activities become an emancipative endeavour, a call
for social change, usually loaded with political conflict. The second option is to reduce
contact; language maintenance activities become involved in quests for more autonomy,
one way of which may also include the formation and expansion of new close-knit
endangered language networks. Network or new communities of practice are proposed to
be at the fore of research. Such insights remind researchers about the importance of not
only involving minority groups in language revitalisation but also of how language
vitality is tied back to the overall well-being and development of a minority group,
particularly economically and socially.
From the point-of-view of minority-group-external factors, the exposure to other
minority languages and the efforts in documenting and revitalising minority languages,
other than the awareness of outsiders’ interest in minority languages, has encouraged
47
language-related activities aimed at promoting awareness, interest, and language use
among minority groups. From the minority-group-internal perspective which interacts
with the group-external factors that group members are exposed to or have experienced,
the shift towards self-determination and self-actualisation is evident among more groups,
leading to more ideological debates whether among group members or with the dominant
group. The interactions between the internal and community-external factors, and
between inward-looking and outward-looking factors, play a role on the awareness on
matters related to heritage and ownership as will become clearer in Chapter 6 (Section
6.3.1, 6.3.2) and Chapter 7 (Section 7.2, 7.3.2, 7.4).
By now, the agency of a minority group in revitalising a language has come to be
recognised as interactive and active in negotiating, and not just being oppressed and
dominated, following the recognition of minority language group’s rights and
community-based approaches (e.g. Sallabank, 2013; Trudell, 2006). The concept of prior
ideological clarification (Fishman, 1991) is crucial and is foregrounded, whether with or
without direct reference to the concept of prior ideological clarification in guides to and
case studies of language revitalisation, emphasising the importance of listening to the
minority groups and conducting research ethically (e.g. Dauenhauer & Dauenhauer,
1998; Grenoble & Whaley, 2006; Hinton, 2001). Questions such as on whose terms a
language is classified endangered (Thiebeger, 2002) or whether a language should be
revitalised and if yes, the extent of the revitalisation efforts, have since then become a
checking point for researchers and activists to be aware of their personal pursuits and
bear in mind the overall goals and needs of a minority group.
There are some important shifts in endangered language studies that have made
more studies possible, ethical and holistic. The dynamics and diversity of minority groups
are now embraced among endangered language researchers, in contrast to the sole pursuit
of language universality or foregoing dynamics over positivistic findings in the past.
48
Dorian (1993) reminds researchers on how a longer term dynamics of a social group
facing language endangerment may be overlooked if the reacquisition efforts of an
endangered language on the part of future group members are overlooked and only the
abandonment phase of a language is reported. In their study, Marquis and Sallabank
(2013) draw attention to how a static notion of a static, traditional island language is
inconsistent with the dynamics of ongoing language change affecting the language
varieties; two ideologies, static and dynamics, are identified to be in ideological conflict.
On embracing diversity, Kroskrity (2004) has pointed out that since social and linguistic
variation provide some of the dynamic forces which influence change, it is more useful
to have an analytical device that captures diversity rather than emphasising a static,
uniformly shared culture (see also Hill & Hill, 1986, Hill, 2002). Insights gained on the
studies on contact languages including Sri Lankan Malay and Baba Malay (Ansaldo,
2009; Lim & Ansaldo, 2007) draw attention to how the terms language shift and language
death may be limited in understanding contact language formation. Ansaldo puts forward
that if patterns of contact language formation can be explored in terms of linguistic
alignment, without necessarily associating it with notions of loss, whether in terms of
language or identity, one can then better explain the linguistic and cultural negotiations
in why a language in multilingual context that is often said to be undergoing language
shift is never fully replaced in language situations. Even though how it can be balanced
in theory and practice between eliminating the elements of language loss and
acknowledging the heritage of a language is beyond the scope of this research, what can
be gathered from such a view is that if integrated in language revitalisation and language
planning, it can allow better embracing of the notion of being multilingual and over-
focusing on what is lost.
49
3.5.2 Planning and Policy
Rather than giving an overview on the key works in language policy and language
planning in this section, for the purpose of this research, it is more helpful to discuss how
works in language policy and language planning have influenced language revitalisation,
especially bottom-up efforts. To be more specific, how ideologies in language policy and
planning have influenced ideologies on the ground are discussed. How language is
invoked as an element to “assert the legitimacy of groups’ claims in the assertion, or
contestation, of power” is considered (Ricento, 2006: 232).
Blommaert (2006) reviews the relationship between language policy and national
identity and points out three crucial effects from a monoglot ideology (citing from
Silverstein, 1996): (i) how it informs practical language regimes in education and other
crucial spheres of public life, (ii) how it produces and regulates identities, and (iii) how it
has also had a tremendous impact on scholarship. As interweaved in the previous sections,
the interactions of global, ecological, and political shifts have effects and impacts on
epistemological and ontological shifts. The shift towards embracing linguistic diversity
is observed to have begun in the 1990s (Sallabank, 2011) and is evident in increasing
studies on minority languages, minority-languages-speaking groups and self-
determination (e.g. May, 1999; McCarthy, 2002). It follows that studies on language
revitalisation have also increased since 1990s. A shift towards recognising language
rights and language ecology paradigms is said to mark the third phase of modern history
of language policy and planning (Ricento, 2009). In the first period during the Post-World
War II era, language planning was oriented around post-colonial nation-building, while
the awareness of and critiques towards the reinforcement of negative associations and
social inequalities in language planning in the first period were raised in the second one.
Although this research focuses on bottom-up language revitalisation efforts,
language revitalisation actors, with or without collaboration with expertise, often and
50
continue to draw from what have been socialised and internalised, namely the top-down
planning and policy. Top-down planning tends to revolve around corpus and status
planning while bottom-up efforts focus on prestige and image (Ager, 2005). Baldauf
(2006) discusses the notion of micro planning in that it is a response to or resistance to
macro or top-down policy and an act of self-determination. Top-down ideologies continue
to interact with bottom-up ideologies on the ground.
Language revitalisation is recognised as a manifestation of language planning.
With the growing recognition on the political and social mobility as important for
language vitality (May, 2003; Mufwene, 2003), language revitalisation has since come to
be not limited to only language in terms of its components and effects. The employment
of a community-based approach suggests that linguists collaborate with communities and
assist in possible ways that the linguists could then add to community development and
language vitality (Austin & Sallabank, 2014).
To effectively address language endangerment, May (2003, 2006, 2012) contend
that legitimatising minority language rights is an essential move. May (2011: 12)
proposes to see ethnic identities not only as representation of inner psychological state or
of particular ideologies about the world, but rather as “social, cultural and political forms
of life – material ways of being in the modern world”. Such a view is parallel with an
ecological view in considering the wider settings and is parallel with views expressed
towards how the focus in the present language revitalisation has to consider a language’s
role in the present socio-economic systems (Mufwene, 2003). This framework denotes a
forward-looking sense while considering the social, cultural and political development in
which language is used in but not limited to material ways.
51
3.5.3 Factors and Variables
When it comes to discussing successful language revitalisation efforts, languages
such as Hebrew, Maori and Hawaiian would come to mind. Some salient factors have
surfaced in language revitalisation efforts, though cannot be determinedly used as
indicators for predicting the vitality of an endangered language without considering the
context and socio-historical background.
Though whether language revitalisation efforts are deemed achieving their goals
or not depends on where one is coming from and the complexity involved in judging these
efforts successful or not, many of the languages that have been reported to be showing
positive progresses in language revitalisation efforts are spoken by people who are
considered native to the land such as indigenous languages all over the world, for
instance, in North America (e.g. Yurok, Wompanoag), Australia and New Zealand (e.g.
Maori) and even in Malaysia (e.g. Semai, Iban, Kadazandusun). Another related or non-
related factor is population size. It is understood that factors and variables discussed in
literature are not to be seen as definite indicators or predictors of a language’s vitality
(e.g. UNESCO), factors such as the inheritance of land or land rights and population size
can play a significant role, among other factors and variables that may add to self-
determination, empowerment and possible social and political mobility. Similar to other
languages that have shown a positive progress in language revitalisation, contact
languages that have been revitalised are mostly those with a large number of population,
sometimes constituting the majority population of a nation, such as Tok Pisin (Siegel,
1999). In considering the presence of these salient factors or variables in this study, while
the group in study has faced a longstanding land issue with the land that was made their
settlement in the 1930s, the population speaking MPC is shrinking from the earlier record
of thousands of speakers to 800-1000 speakers (Baxter, 1988, 2013).
52
Perceiving the significance of a minority language or a high identity marking has
also been pointed out as a key factor in supporting language maintenance and
revitalisation (Austin & Sallabank, 2014; Bradley & Bradley, 2002; Kroskrity & Field,
2009). Positive attitudes, perceptions, ideologies and beliefs, apart from loyalty and pride
towards a language, among group members naturally underlie this key factor but the same
coming from other groups or even outsiders would add to the positive image of the
language. However, studies have also shown that there can be a mismatch between
positive perceptions of a language and actual language use (e.g. Dauenhauer &
Daunhauer, 1998; Pillai, Soh & Satomi, 2014; Sallabank, 2013). It may also be worrying
if a positive perception of a language may give out misleading perceptions about language
vitality.
Following more studies on the ecology and evolution of languages as discussed
earlier, the consideration of the ecology and evolution of a minority language is
increasingly relevant to understanding the factors and variables in language revitalisation.
Cited earlier, Fishman (1988) points out that support is most needed at the point of the
cultural matrix in which language is a part of, rather than the language. In a relevant sense,
Mühlhäusler (2003: 241) points out that “[w]hat is at risk are not individual languages
but the complex ecological support system that sustains linguistic diversity.” May (2003)
points out the importance of political recognition and mobility of minority groups in
campaigning or exercising their minority language rights. Also reminding researchers
about the reality to be considered is how language vitality is linked to whether a language
has a role to play in the socio-economic systems, a point made by Dorian (1998) and
Mufwene (2003). What have been discussed so far point to the need to approach language
endangerment and language revitalisation as larger phenomena, considerations, and
support need to be directed at the overall development, well-being and cultural climate of
minority groups.
53
3.5.4 Evaluating Language Revitalisation
Evaluation in language revitalisation has been mostly referred to in the sense of
evaluating ideological underpinnings and assessing factors in language vitality, while
drawing upon models and frameworks in language revitalisation studies, most notably the
GIDS scale in Fishman (1991). This is different from the notion of evaluating language
revitalisation throughout the present study as it is used to refer to the evaluation or rather,
conceptualisation, of the processes and outcome of language revitalisation instead. In
acknowledging that each language development is unique (Grenoble & Whaley, 2006;
Hinton, 2001), this implies that researchers are cautioned against imposing frameworks
and models on each case while linguists and group members draw upon these frameworks
and models in planning language revitalisation. To evaluate language revitalisation then
can be subjective to individual interpretation and can differ among different parties (e.g.
the policy-makers, the linguists, the group members).
In discussing the MPC language revitalisation process cycle, some kind of
evaluation is in need though as will be discussed in Chapter 7, the notion of evaluating
referred to in the present study is not strictly evaluating in terms of success rate and
predicting vitality. The discussion on the bottom-up MPC language revitalisation efforts
then has to consider the efforts, which are fairly recent and mostly sporadic (e.g. mostly
individual or group’s efforts, on-and-off in reality, follow-up efforts could take a long
time) to date, do not make a suitable candidate for a longitudinal evaluation at the time of
research. Another two considerations are how, as mentioned in Chapter 1, it was observed
prior to and during the conduct of this research that not many participated or knew much
about the bottom-up MPC language revitalisation, and how strict and pre-mature
evaluations that do not consider the context and environment of the language and group
in study could leave negative impacts on the group and the bottom-up language
54
revitalisation efforts. For the purpose of this research, a better way of looking at the
bottom-up MPC language revitalisation would be to understand the experiences of the
group members and make propositions for language revitalisation based on data. The
evaluation of the MPC language revitalisation process cycle is thus proposed to focus on
the meanings of language revitalisation, how sub-processes can add to our understanding
of the group members’ experiences, and how such understanding can further inform
language revitalisation planning.
In search of a suitable way of evaluating the MPC language revitalisation efforts,
the present study takes cue from King (2001), who in turn draws from Cooper (1989)’s
accounting scheme for language planning activities in framing the Saraguro language
revitalisation. Such a decision is based on the accounting scheme’s focus on grassroots
activities, and Cooper’s aligning language planning with types of influence to behaviours
instead of outright change. Cooper puts forward a definition of language planning after
reviewing previous definitions – who plans what for whom by how?. King’s condensation
of Cooper’s accounting scheme phrased as eight sub-questions is referred to below and
will be revisited in Chapter 7:
(i) What actors, (ii) attempt to influence what behaviours, (iii) of which people,
(iv) for what ends, (v) under what conditions, (vi) by what means, (vii) through
what decision making process, (viii) with what effect?
3.6 Contact Languages
That contact languages such as pidgins and creoles are understudied in relation to
language endangerment, documentation, and revitalisation has come to be noticed,
including the case of MPC (Bartens, 2005; Garrett, 2006; O’Shannessy, 2011). Concerns
are raised on contact languages being “marginalised doubly: marginalised among the
world’s languages in general, and then marginalised again among threatened languages”
55
(Garrett, 2006: 178). Garrett (2006) puts forwards two reasons to explain the lack of
attention on contact languages as endangered languages: relatively short histories (less
than 400 years is cited) and a lack of anatomy (many creoles are spoken alongside their
lexifiers). The ethnic identities of contact-language-speaking groups are said to be more
likely to be open to negotiation and contestation, in comparison to aboriginal groups with
a long-standing history with a certain land or territory.
However, advantages can come out of the lack of autonomy, as is observed by
Mufwene (2003) in cases in which strongly stigmatised vernacular varieties persist
through despite pressures from standardised varieties acquiring literacy. Garrett
postulates from Mufwene’s reasoning that contact languages in contact with dominant
languages other than their lexifiers would tend to be in greater danger. Bartens (2005)
also relates the relatively high degree of creole endangerments to the particular socio-
history of creole languages up to the present, but notes that creole languages have also
come to be defined as a synchronically discrete class of languages, citing McWhorter
(1998, 2005).
In the case of MPC, MPC is more than 500 years old, but nonetheless its socio-
history is considered short, and there is a lack of record on its history if compared to other
non-contact-language languages. MPC persists through despite not being spoken
alongside European Portuguese though Portuguese and Brasilian tourists and researchers’
visits to the PS, the advance of information technology, and Portuguese materials brought
to and left in the PS have made European or Brasilian Portuguese more accessible. Baxter
(2012) has also discussed the presence of European Portuguese in the PS. Though MPC,
along with other contact languages, has come to be recognised as a synchronically
discrete class of languages by linguists, a diachronic connection with its lexifier language
has, according to Mufwene (2003: 330), lead to “speakers of stigmatised vernaculars
think[ing] that they speak the same language as the prestigious variety in which they are
56
provided literacy”, though many among the speakers would recognise that they speak a
unique variety when compared to its lexifier. The access to more literacy in European
Portuguese may be part of the shift in trend that has, along with the echoes of the
celebration of the Portuguese arrival in PS, and cultural activities such as those held in
PS (e.g. annual San Pedro festival) or those held outside PS (e.g. Penang Eurasian
Festival) that have drawn attention to both MPC and European Portuguese in Malaysia,
or among Malacca Portuguese descendants immigrants in other parts of the world. The
interaction between socio-historical development and the on-going negotiation and
contestation of identification and ideologies demonstrated here again reinforces the
argument in the present study: the present circumstances of any language and group have
to be understood and examined against the socio-historical and political development, as
discussed in Chapter 2.
O’Shannesy (2011) links the continuous pressure to shift to a target language,
which has accompanied the emergence of a contact language right from the beginning, to
the cause of endangerment for contact languages. The low prestige of the contact
language and the continuous pressure to shift to new languages can lead to the possibly
lower chances of documenting contact languages before they are lost, as well as valuable
information such as what kinds of combinations and influences, the kinds of social
situations that brought them about, detailed socio-historical data (e.g. the identity of the
agents of change), the degree of bilingualism or multilingualism of the speakers, the
relative dominance and use of the languages, and the types of interactions that took place
(O’Shannesy, 2011; Winford, 2003).
Portuguese-based contact languages that are commonly referred to as creoles may
be distinguished by two general groups: the African group (e.g. spoken in Cape Verde,
Guinea-Bissau, Angolar, Príncipe, São Tomé and Annobon) and the Asian group (e.g.
spoken in Diu, Daman, Korlai, and Cannanore in India, in Batticaloa in Sri Lanka, in
57
Bidau, Macau and Malacca in East and Southeast Asia) (Clements, 1991). MPC is said
to be “the last vital variety of a group of East and Southeast Asian Creole Portuguese
languages” (Baxter, 2012: 115). Clements (1991) draws attention to and affirms the
neglect in research on the Portuguese-based creoles of the Asian group. Speaking of the
situation in India, Clements observes such projects do not hold interest as such research
is regarded of secondary importance to, among others, literacy projects. In addition, in
the West, an apparent lack of interest in the Portuguese-based creoles is said to due, in
part, to the general state of Portuguese studies, as Portuguese is considered a minor
Romance language and attracts far less attention in research despite surpassing speakers
of Francophones in number (Holm, 1989).
Different scenarios have taken place for different Portuguese-based varieties all
over the world (Bartens, 2005; Holm, 1989). Interrelated common reasons for contact
language endangerment include stigmatisation of such contact languages as corrupt
varieties, the shift towards language(s) with linguistic capital, and marginalisation of
contact languages as driven by socio-economic and political development. Some
Portuguese-based varieties have become recognised as separate languages when a change
in power took place. These include Papiamentu and Cape Verdean. Some other
Portuguese-based varieties continue to be spoken as a minority language without
recognition alongside other majority and minority languages though being spoken less
and less due to socio-economic and political development as in the case of MPC and Fa
d’Ambu spoken on the island of Annobόn (Bartens, 2005). Bartens also adds that
sometimes no type of coercion is needed for a creole language to become endangered, as
in the case of a Portuguese-based variety spoken in the Gulf of Guinea, Principense, that
was drastically decimated by a sleeping sickness epidemic around 1900 and has been
undergoing language shift due to importation of contract workers speaking varieties of
Cape Verdean Creole Portuguese around 1900; language shift to Standard Portuguese is
58
also in the background though it is less influential than the language shift brought about
by the Cape-Verdean-Creole-Portuguese-varieties-speaking contract workers (Holm,
1989). Discussion on MPC usually is filled with a surprising tone at its survival as it is
not spoken by a large number of population compared to other minority languages in
Malaysia, nor is it spoken alongside its lexifier language or recognised but these might
have just be why it has managed to survive as it has been while MPC continues to bear
witness of natural and socio-political development as it undergoes language shift and of
linguistic empowerment as group members initiate language revitalisation efforts.
Similar to other languages, population size and status are determining factors in
contact language revitalisation. These factors are demonstrated in cases in which contact
languages are the first language of the majority of a nation such as Cape Verde and Pijin
(Carter & Aulette, 2009; Jourdan & Angeli, 2014), and those that are national languages
such as Tok Pisin. The inheritance of land for contact languages that fall into the
parameter of migrant subordinate (Lieberson et al, 1975, cited here from Ricento, 2006:
248, in contrast to three other parameters: indigenous superordinate, migrant
superordinate and indigenous subordinate) is out of the picture for migrant groups who
have resettled in the new society. Their land rights are subjected to whether the group of
people are allocated a settlement, as the group in study is. However, the rights to the
settlement, though stated or promised, are still subjected to the top-down policies. Recall
also how the criteria for planning pupil’s own language in Malaysia include the number
of speakers, as discussed in Chapter 2. These demonstrate the support needed and
challenges in MPC language revitalisation.
This chapter discusses how language endangerment and revitalisation can be an
ideological site for the interplay between discourses, ideologies and identities. The
59
present trends and shifts, be it global, social or epistemological, are encouraging for the
overall cultural climate in embracing linguistic diversity and multilingualism. These
contribute to the acknowledgment and recognition of the complexity and fluidity of
identities and ideologies, minority language rights and group members’ agency as
interactive and active. These, in turn, are helpful in conceptualising the relationship
between discourses, ideologies and identities. Towards the end of this chapter, contact
languages are considered in relation to why they are underrepresented. What is also
implied is the question as to why contact languages need to be studied, as questioned by
Garett (2006). The literature demonstrates that support is indeed in need at the cultural
matrix (Fishman, 1988) and complex ecological systems (Mühlhäusler, 2003) in which
MPC is a part of, and at the level of political mobility (May, 2003) and keeping MPC
relevant in the present socio-economic systems (Dorian, 1998; Mufwene, 2003).
60
CHAPTER 4: THEORETICAL APPROACH
4.1 Introduction
This chapter presents the theoretical approach of the present study that drew upon
Constructivist Grounded Theory (Charmaz, 2006, 2014) as heuristic guidelines. An
introduction to this theoretical approach is necessary as Grounded Theory Method is still
underused in the field of linguistics. Readers are firstly informed about how this
theoretical approach was chosen based on its philosophical underpinnings and conduct
that make it a fit for the qualitative, explorative inquiry. How Grounded Theory came
about and how a study employing Constructivist Grounded Theory is positioned in
relation to the present and past discussions are considered. Readers are then introduced
to Grounded Theory Method, the umbrella term for a family of methods claiming the
mantle of Grounded Theory Method. Towards the end of this chapter, some
considerations in practice are discussed before how Constructivist Grounded Theory was
adapted into the procedures of conducting this doctoral research is presented in Chapter
5.
4.2 Rationale for the Choice of Approach
The underlying philosophies of various approaches were considered before a
decision was made on the approach of this research (see, for example, Creswell, 2012;
Denscombe, 2010; Grbich, 2013 for discussions on various approaches to qualitative
studies). This section discusses the fit between considerations in choosing an approach
and Constructivist Grounded Theory.
Prior to starting data collection for this research, other approaches that might be
suitable for this research such as ethnography, case study, phenomenology and
conversation analysis were considered. Ethnography was considered in the beginning as
61
it would allow the voice of the people be heard. For the purpose of this research, however,
it was reasoned that it would be more insightful and helpful to approach people who
would be able to help shed some lights on this research topic as language efforts are not
easily observed if compared to observing a culture or a phenomenon. Case studies, which
allows researchers to investigate an issue in depth and provide an explanation that can
cope with the complexity and subtlety of real life situations (Denscombe, 2010), were
considered too. However, the approach of case study did not dictate which method or
methods must be used, so I continued looking for method or methods that could be
adapted for this research. Phenomenology makes a suitable approach in dealing with
human experience, but it is concerned with getting a clear picture of the things as directly
experienced by people and can be more descriptive than analytic. As for conversation
analysis and other approaches to analysing discourse, in considering the fit between these
approaches and the purpose of the present research, eventually decisions were made to
look for another approach. This is because the present research purpose was not to weigh
in on how people use language such as exerting power through language (e.g. turn-taking)
or testing theories. This research also did not set out to test theory or hypotheses. It is
essentially not so much about studying language but studying language as the central
topic of debate. In the end, it was decided that the present research purpose, philosophical
and methodological considerations were better matched by Grounded Theory Method,
based on the following reasons:
i. Listening to the research participants
To explore the language-related experience of the MPC-speaking group, a
strong need was felt to look for an approach which would respect the idea
that each endangered language and each community or group are individual
and unique, following researchers such as Grenoble and Whaley (2006) who
emphasize that there is no one language revitalisation program that can be
62
used for all endangered languages and their associated communities. That
approach would allow listening to what research participants would have to
say instead of going to the field while being driven by a theoretical
framework. It was hoped that this would keep the extent of imposing ideas
and pre-assumptions on research participants and their heritage language to
a possible minimum and would let the data be the platform where concepts
and meanings are derived from. Grounded Theory Method is known for its
reflexive openness in exploring a central topic or phenomenon.
ii. Collaborative framework
When choosing an approach for this research, I hoped to continue the nature
of prior fieldwork and connections built from earlier field trips for projects
with the MPC-speaking group in the PS, Malacca. Although this thesis
employs the term research participants as used in Constructivist Grounded
Theory, they are in effect similar to how language consultants are to
language documentation and fieldwork. In a study employing Constructivist
Grounded Theory, research participants are seen as the experts who co-
construct knowledge in a substantive area with me, the researcher.
iii. Researching in an ethical and productive way
Other considerations stem from previous visits to the research site and
getting to know more members of the community since December 2011
such as how to explore my research topic with an open mind, care and ethics
while trying to keep to a productive timeline. I reflected from reading
literature and other language-revitalisation-related theses and also guts
feelings after having visited the research site while working as a project
63
team member to document MPC language and culture in 2011-2012.
Grounded Theory Method appealed to me, considering the depth, breadth
and duration of research that could involve, in that it offers a systematic,
inductive and comparative approach in guiding researchers to pursue
theoretical leads that emerge from data, leading to a theory. The idea of
conducting an individual, large scale, qualitative and exploratory inquiry
that involved fieldwork was naturally intimidating in the beginning. The
final decision was made based on how the approach’s underpinnings and
guidelines allow researchers to adapt the guidelines to their work while
“learning about the specific and the general – and seeing what is new in
them – then exploring their links to larger issues or creating larger
unrecognised issues in entirety” (Charmaz, 2006: 181).
The feasibility and criticisms of Grounded Theory Method were considered too.
For instance, Denscombe (2010: 122) lists the disadvantages of Grounded Theory
approach to be, among others, the unpredictable end of research if not planned well, the
tendency to “divorce the explanation of the situation being studied from broader
contextual factors”, the extent of minimising prior conceptions regarding one’s research
topic, potential strands of positivism, being too reliable on the data and potential risks in
using generalisations from data gathered.
In the present research, a plan was set out which was to be prepared to be flexible
to modify the research plan while keeping a clear timeline of research. It is true that it
may be challenging to keep one’s mind clear of any pre-conceptions but as this research
addresses a new topic in its own way since there has not been much research done on the
exploration of revitalisation of the contact language in study, pre-conceptions were able
to be kept to a minimum. In addition, Constructivist Grounded Theory acknowledges that
64
it is essential to take the researcher’s position, privileges, perspective, and interaction into
account as an inherent part of the research reality (Charmaz, 2006, 2014). However, what
is more important is how researchers have to be reflexive and mindful of their conduct of
research, actions and words so as to be aware of possible pre-assumptions and impositions
made and to acknowledge them if any. Literature read confirms that this thesis had not
been re-inventing the wheel and that generalisations drawn from findings would have to
be seen as theoretical generalisations since it is not the purpose of Grounded Theory to
make generalisations from the sample to a wider population (Charmaz, 2006, 2014;
Glaser & Strauss, 1967). The findings of this research led to a substantive model. To say
that a substantive model cannot be generalised does not mean that the concepts and
categories that emerge in research cannot be related to concepts and categories of other
social processes. It is only appropriate that it is recognised that there is no one research
strategy out there that has received only supports and no critiques. Researchers have to
be aware of what entails with each strategy and how to use each strategy with care and
reflexivity.
After considering and weighing the suitability of the main variations of Grounded
Theory, the guidelines from Charmaz (2006, 2014) were integrated into this research
based on my position as a researcher, epistemological and methodological considerations.
In Glaser and Strauss’s original work (1967; see also Section 4.3 and 4.4 below), the
process of discovering theory emerges from the data is separate from the scientific
observer. This reflects the positivist strand from sociology methods. A constructivist
approach, however, sees social reality as multiple, processual and constructed (Section
4.4). It follows that we must take the researcher’s position and experience into account as
a part of the constructed reality in the research context.
The present study sees knowledge gained from data and analysis as created from
shared experiences and relationships with participants, taking a constructivist stand
65
(Charmaz, 1990, 2000, 2006, 2014). Constructivist grounded theorists are said to take a
reflective stance towards the research process and products and assume that both data and
analyses are social constructions that reflect what their production entailed (Charmaz,
2000, 2006, 2014). Being aware of the disputes and critiques among grounded theorists
resulting from the stand between interpretive or constructionist and positivist or
objectivist traditions, Charmaz (2000) explicates the different forms of Grounded Theory.
How and why participants construct meanings and actions in specific situations are
studied by constructivists while objectivists assume that data represent objective facts
about a knowable world, waiting to be discovered by researchers (see Section 4.4).
Adopting the inductive, comparative, emergent and open-ended approach from
Glaser and Strauss (1965, 1967), Charmaz adapts the theory to her constructive
underpinnings. Charmaz was motivated by her dissatisfaction with approaches in her
discipline that treated their analyses as accurate renderings of the studied worlds rather
than as constructions of them. Charmaz chose the term constructivist to acknowledge
subjectivity and researcher’s involvement in data construction and data interpretation
while distinguishing her approach from the conventional social constructionism of the
1980 and early 1990s. Aligning herself with social constructivists whose influences
include Lev Vygotsky (1962) and Yvonna Lincoln (2013), social contexts, interaction,
viewpoints sharing, and interpretive understandings are emphasised while knowing and
learning are seen as embedded in social life (Charmaz, 2014).
Charmaz’s interpretation of the originators’ work has drawn comments, even from
the originator, Glaser (1998), though some are not directed at Charmaz but more at the
variations of Grounded Theory including Strauss and Cobin (1990). It is fair to say that
the original work has also developed since then and, as Bryant and Charmaz (2007a: 6)
notes, “the method itself has now taken on a life of its own”.
66
4.3 How Grounded Theory Came About
Grounded Theory is known to have been developed by Barney G. Glaser and
Anselm L. Strauss as they worked with the terminally ill (Glaser & Strauss, 1967).
Integrating logic and assumptions from symbolic interactionism rooted in pragmatism on
Glaser’s side and principles and methods from Chicago school of sociology on Strauss’s
side, Glaser and Strauss introduced a qualitative but nonetheless systematic, reliable and
valid strategy to generate theory from data. The discovery of theory from data was seen
as their major task confronting sociology as they felt a need to come up with a qualitative
research approach that would allow qualitative research to be done in a systematic way,
and to generate middle-range theories though the progress towards formal theories is
possible and encouraged (Glaser & Strauss, 1967; Glaser, 2007). They also put forward
an open invitation to stimulate other researchers to codify and publish their own methods
for generating theory.
Table 4.1 shows Glaser and Strauss’s background as individuals that contributed
to the birth of Grounded Theory in the 1960s with reference to the Grounded Theory
seminal texts (Bryant & Charmaz, 2007b; Charmaz, 2014; Glaser & Strauss, 1967).
Grounded Theory is said to bear strands of positivism while possessing interpretivist
elements as it relies on empirical observations and depends on the researcher’s
constructions of them (Charmaz, 2014). The positivist strands are said to reflect Glaser’s
quantitative methods and training in middle-range theories at Columbia University with
Paul Lazarsfeld and Glaser’s advocating the building of useful middle-range theories, as
proposed by the Columbia University theorist Robert Merton. On Strauss’s side that
contributed to the Grounded Theory methods are especially how reality and selves are
viewed as constructed and fluid, drawing upon North American philosophical tradition,
symbolic interactionism and ethnographic tradition.
67
Table 4.1: Insights from pragmatism and sociology
Glaser’s background Strauss’s background

● Chicago school sociology foundations and ● North American philosophical tradition, views
methodological principles informed by pragmatist reality as characterised by indeterminacy and
philosophy, life history analysis, and field fluidity, and as open to multiple interpretations,
research; assumes dynamic, reciprocal assumes people are active and creative, meanings
relationships between interpretation and action emerge through practical actions to solve problems
and through actions people learn the world.
● Quantitative methods: empiricism, rigorous ● Symbolic interactionism: informed by George

codified method, emphasis on emergent Herbert Mead’s philosophical pragmatism, a
discoveries theoretical perspective derived from pragmatism
which assumes people construct selves, society,
and reality through interaction, focuses on
dynamic relationships between meaning and
actions, meanings arise out of actions and
influence actions, assumes individuals are active,
creative, and reflective and that social life consists
of process.
● Training in middle-range theories ● Ethnographic tradition
However, the 1990s saw a move away from positivism in Grounded Theory as the
originators and their students eventually refined Grounded Theory in their own way
following their underlying philosophical and epistemological influences. Such a progress
is only natural as the original work by Glaser and Strauss (1967) points out the
significance of keeping an eye on each researcher’s ideology as it directs the research,
other than the research being directed by the frameworks of ideas known as sociology of
work and symbolic interactionism.
The following years saw the emergence of more variations of Grounded Theory,
while Glaser (1992) and Strauss (Strauss & Cobin, 1990; Cobin & Strauss, 2008) went
on different paths to develop and refine their versions of Grounded Theory. The original
definition of Grounded Theory by Glaser and Strauss has since been refined by the
originators separately or by their followers. As new waves of philosophical and
methodological underpinnings have been introduced in the academic scene, Grounded
Theory has also been adapted with reference to individual choices of ontological and
epistemological stance such as constructionist (Charmaz, 1995; 2000; 2006) or
68
postmodernist (Clarke, 2005), to the extent that as many as seven different versions of
Grounded Theory, though some versions overlapping in categories or some not having
clear distinctions from others, were found by Denzin (2007: 454): “positivist,
postpositivist, constructivist, objectivist, postmodern, situational, and computer assisted”.
It is worth noting that different scholars may have different interpretations of the
variations and categorisation of Grounded Theory; “at its simplest level, we have the
Glaserian school of Grounded Theory, the Strauss and Cobin school and the
Constructivist” since the seven versions found by Denzin can fit in these three main
variations, as pointed out by Bryant and Charmaz (2007a: 10-11). It is observed that the
importance of identifying one’s own philosophical and methodological positioning before
drawing the best from a variety of thinkers in integrating Grounded Theory into individual
research designs is acknowledged (Birks & Mills, 2011).
Although there is no consensus on the categorisation of the variations of Grounded
Theory depending on how one interprets the different variations, the contemporary
grounded theorists contend that there are some fundamentals or there is a set of methods
or tools that are essential to Grounded Theory research design and must be used in order
for the final product to be considered as such (Birks & Mills, 2011; Bryant & Charmaz,
2007a; Charmaz, 2006, 2014) while building on and expanding the Grounded Theory
literature. Glaser and Strauss (1967) encourage researchers to generate more theories and
hope that their suggestions for systematising should not hinder anyone’s creativity for
generating theory though, as with any other theories, it is inevitable that criticisms and
debate about the variations of Grounded Theory continue.
The conceptual terminology used in Grounded Theory has developed over time.
Table 4.2 summarises the conceptual terminology from the Grounded Theory seminal
texts. It is expanded on Birks and Mills (2011: 178) by adding Corbin and Strauss (2008)
and Charmaz (2014), though terms used in these later works do not differ from the same
69
authors’ earlier editions in terms of the concepts. Depending on one’s choice of Grounded
Theory approach, the processes of coding can differ slightly in terms of coding paradigms,
as in whether one follows a formulae or rules-of-thumbs in coding or not. Charmaz (2006,
2014) encourages researchers to resist mechanical applications of Grounded Theory
Method as the concept of a coding paradigm can be problematic (Bryant & Charmaz,
2007a). In general, researchers (i) code data in ways deemed suitable (e.g. word-by-word,
line-by-line), (ii) group codes under categories and broader concepts, (iii) identify the
most salient concepts and categories, and (iv) try to conceptualise the relationships
between codes, categories and concepts before exhausting the codes and employing
theoretical sampling (further sampling for concepts and properties of concepts) to saturate
the properties and dimensions of codes. Readers are reminded that the coding process is
iterative or cyclical as is with Grounded Theory Method as a whole, in the sense of how
researchers move back and forth between data and conceptualisation (e.g. between codes
and categories, categories and concepts).
70
Table 4.2: Development of conceptual terminology
Concepts
Codes Categories Properties Core category Methods of
and theoretical
dimensions abstraction
Glaser Coding Categories Properties Systematic Common
and incidents substantive sociological
Strauss theory perspectives
(1967)
Strauss Open coding Categories which Properties Core variables Theoretical
(1978) that moves to are and that explain a codes
selective coding interchangeably typologies basic social
of incidents referred to as process
once the core concepts
variable is
identified
Strauss Coding Categories Properties Core category ---
(1987) paradigm: and
conditions, dimensions
interactions,
strategies,
tactics, and
consequence.
Open, axial and
selective coding
Strauss Coding Categories and Properties Core category Storyline and
and Cobin paradigm: sub-categories and is a central the conditional
(1990) cause, context, dimensions phenomenon matrix
action/
interactions, and
consequence.
Open, axial and
selective coding
Strauss Coding Categories and Properties, Central Storyline and
and Cobin paradigm: sub-categories dimensions category the conditional/
(1998); conditions, and coding consequential
Cobin and actions/ for process matrix
Strauss interactions and
(2008) consequence.
Open, axial and
selective coding
Clarke Codes Categories Seeking Multiple Situational
(2005) variation in possible social maps, social
the situation processes and works/ arena
of enquiry sub-processes maps and
through: positional
situational discourse maps
maps, social and associated
worlds/ analyses
arena maps
and
positional
maps
Charmaz Initial, focused Categories Properties Theoretical Theoretical
(2006; and axial coding concepts codes
2014)
71
Critiques and arguments entail each version of Grounded Theory. For instance, in
Glaser (1992)’s perspective, Strauss and Corbin’s approach do not match the
fundamentals of Grounded Theory as he finds that their procedures force data and analysis
into preconceived categories and ignore emergence. The present study follows Charmaz
(2006, 2014) and Bryant and Charmaz (2007a) in seeing the major versions of Grounded
Theory as constituting a constellation or a family of methods. It is proposed that the
constellation or the process of conducting a Grounded Theory study be labelled as
Grounded Theory Method while the product of a Grounded Theory study is known as
Grounded Theory although this thesis also uses Grounded Theory interchangeably
between research method or methodology and product, especially when referring to
works before such a constellation was proposed. The different versions of Grounded
Theory Method share much in common in terms of approach (e.g. reflexivity, iterative,
inductive) and procedures (e.g. coding, constant comparison, theoretical sampling) (see
Section 4.4) while they differ on foundational assumptions, epistemology and ontology.
The main distinction between the underpinnings of the two orientations in Grounded
Theory Method is discussed in the following section before an overview of Grounded
Theory Method follows.
4.4 The Objectivist and Constructivist Orientations
Glaser and Strauss (1967) take systematic qualitative analysis to another level by
showing how it can have its own logic and could generate theory. In Glaser and Strauss
(1967: 3)’s perspective, the interrelated job of theory in sociology include:
i. to enable prediction and explanation of behaviour,
ii. to be useful in theoretical advance in sociology,
72
iii. to be usable in practical applications – prediction and explanation should be
able to give the practitioner a perspective on behaviour – a stance to be taken
toward data,
iv. to guide and provide a style for research on particular areas of behaviour.
A theory is thought to be a strategy for handling data in research, leading to the
producing of different modes of conceptualisation for describing and explaining. It must
(i) “fit the situation being researched” or must be readily but not forcibly applicable to
and indicated by the data, and (ii) “work when put into use”, meaning theory must be
meaningfully relevant to and be able to explain the behaviour under study (Glaser &
Strauss, 1967: 4). The generating of both formal and substantive theories has always been
welcomed in Grounded Theory Method literature. The building of middle-range theories,
consisting of abstract renderings of specific social phenomena that are grounded in data
and in contrast with grand theories, was advocated by Glaser. Nevertheless, Glaser (2007)
shows how Grounded Theory Method can be used to construct formal theory. Although
what theory means may be slightly different to different people, its meaning often
revolves around “relationship” and “explaining”. Thornberg and Charmaz (2012: 4)
define that “A theory states relationships between relationships between abstract concepts
and may aim for either explanation or understanding”. These relationships between sets
of relationships between abstract concepts provide the leads and triggers for taking
research further and beyond.
There are generally two orientations to theory that weigh in on Grounded Theory
Method: positivist, which lays the foundation for objectivist Grounded Theory
approaches, and interpretivist, which has its roots in pragmatism and under which
Constructivist Grounded Theory is aligned with, as introduced earlier. Grounded Theory,
in the very beginning, was said to bear strands of positivism. Positivist definitions of
73
theory are said to treat theory as a statement of relationships between abstract concepts
that covers a wide range of empirical observations. Positivists view theoretical concepts
as variables and focus on observable facts. In contrast, interpretivist definitions of theory
emphasise interpretation and give abstract understanding greater priority: the aim is to
understand meanings and actions and how people construct them (Charmaz, 2014).
Differences between the two orientations lie in their underpinnings and are
summarised in Table 4.3 (Charmaz, 2014: 236). It is recognised that there has been a
move away from positivism or a move towards constructivist among grounded theorists
such as Corbin (Corbin & Strauss, 2008) although Charmaz (2014) notes that the premises
and perspectives emanating from positivism may be more transparent in Grounded
Theory compared to other types of qualitative research. Stemming from different
epistemological and ontological underpinnings, the differences between the two
orientations are naturally rooted in how reality (e.g. external vs. indeterminate) and
knowledge (e.g. separating vs. joining facts and values) are approached.
Table 4.3: Epistemological underpinnings of Grounded Theory
Objectivist Interpretivist
Follows the scientific method Emphasises problem-solving
Assumes an external reality Assumes a fluid, somewhat indeterminate reality
Unbiased observer Defines multiple perspectives
Discovers abstract generalities Studies people’s actions to solve emergent
problems
Explains empirical phenomena Studies people’s actions to solve emergent
problems
Separates facts and values Joins facts and values
Truth is provisional Truth is provisional
Charmaz (2014: 236) also compares objectivist to constructivist Grounded Theory
Method in terms of foundational assumptions, objectives and implications of data
analyses. This comparison allows readers to gain a clearer and fuller picture of the
differences between the two orientations. The constructivist strand was a determining
74
factor when considering which theoretical approach and which variation of Grounded
Theory Method to draw upon.
Table 4.4: Objectivist and Constructivist Grounded Theory
Comparisons and Constrasts

Objectivist Grounded Theory Constructivist Grounded Theory
Foundational Assumptions Foundational Assumptions
●Assumes an external reality ●Assumes multiple realities
●Assumes discovery of data ●Assumes mutual construction of data through
●Assumes conceptualisations emerge from data interaction
analysis ●Assumes researcher constructs categories
●Views representation of data as unproblematic ●Views representation of data as problematic,
●Assumes the neutrality, passivity, and authority relativistic, situational, and partial
of the observer ●Assumes the observer’s values, priorities,
positions, and actions affect views.
Objectives Objectives
●Aims to achieve context-free generalisations ●Views generalisations as partial, conditional, and
●Aims for parsimonious, abstract situated in time, space, positions, action, and
conceptualisations that transcend historical and interactions
situational locations ●Aims for interpretive understanding of
●Aims to create theory that fits, works, has historically situated data
relevance, and is modifiable, (Glaser) ●Specifies range of variation
●Aims to create theory that has credibility,
originality, resonance, and usefulness.
Implications for Data Analysis Implications for Data Analysis
●Views data analysis as an objective process ●Acknowledges subjectivities throughout data
●Sees emergent categories as forming the analysis analysis
●Sees reflectivity as one possible data source ●Views co-constructed data as beginning the
●Gives priority to researcher’s analytic categories analytic direction
and voice. ●Engages in reflexivity throughout the research
process
●Seeks and (re)represents participants” views and
voices as integral to the analysis.
By employing Constructivist Grounded Theory, the foundational assumptions,
epistemological and methodological underpinnings that come with it frame the present
research as Charmaz (2006, 2014) builds on the pragmatist underpinnings in Grounded
Theory and advances interpretive analyses that acknowledge any theoretical rendering
offers an interpretation of the studied world and a construction of reality. The present
study aims for a substantive theory in a particular context, which provides insights into a
part of a minority group’s social life: their experiences and expressivity in managing the
relevance of their heritage language and in the MPC language revitalisation process cycle.
75
4.5 Grounded Theory Method
As introduced earlier, this thesis follows Bryant and Charmaz (2007a) in using
the term, Grounded Theory Method, as an umbrella term to refer to a family of
methodologies that share practices and methods, regardless of one’s philosophical and
epistemological orientation. These shared practices and methods allow studies drawing
upon Grounded Theory Method to be replicated. It is noted that among studies claiming
to be Grounded Theory studies, there can be studies that employ the approach partially or
fully.
There can be different opinions on the most representative features of Grounded
Theory Method. Bryant and Charmaz (2007a) draw from Wittgenstein (1953, cited here
from Bryant & Charmaz, 2007a: 11)’s concept of family resemblances in explaining how
researchers have their own ideas of what constitute the key features of Grounded Theory
Method. The relationship between the approaches that come under Grounded Theory
Method are analogous to how in real families, memberships can become contested or
individuals can be excluded. Bryant and Charmaz talk about the demands for a prescribed
manual in conducting a Grounded Theory study and argue for viewing Grounded Theory
Method as a family of methods, in that researchers invoke differences of approach and of
substance, and specify the relationships between approaches and substantive analyses.
While pointing out that some researchers have defined a set of criteria for Grounded
Theory Method, Charmaz (2006, 2014) is inclined towards resisting a mechanical
application of Grounded Theory Method. To Charmaz, Grounded Theory Method
involves learning about the specific and the general, seeing what is new in them, and
exploring their links to larger issues or creating larger unrecognised issues in entirety: an
imaginative strand is implicitly interwoven with the constructivist strand in the research
process.
76
Figure 4.1 (Charmaz, 2014: 18) visualises a research process that is guided by
Grounded Theory Methodology. The research process is inductive, in that it starts with
open but purposeful sampling, approaching people who can shed lights on a research area
or topic. In practice, the research process is not a strictly linear process, as might have
suggested in Figure 4.1, instead it is iterative and recursive, as depicted in Figure 4.2.
77
Writing Up
Dissertation
Theory Building Categories

reaching
SATURATION
Memo- Incomplete Constant

Focused Coding Comparative
and Categories understanding raises
questions, fill Method
writing
properties of categories
Examples within the

Initial Coding data or from new data
Theoretical Sampling
Data Collection to develop theoretical
categories
Recruitment
and Sampling of
Participants
Research
Question
Figure 4.1: A visual representation of a Grounded Theory (Charmaz, 2014: 18,

originally appeared in Tweed & Charmaz, 2011: 133)
78
Data Collection Data Analysis
Initial data collection Initial coding

(e.g. conversations) Preliminary analysis (Grouping
codes)
Further data collection Initial coding for new data

(e.g. more conversations) Focused coding for existing data
Grouping codes and identifying
categories
Theoretical sampling based on

leads from existing data to Focused coding
further sample concepts Check categories and concepts
against data
Further literature review to Theoretical conceptualisation

check categories and concepts for building concepts
Considering relationships
between codes, categories and
concepts
Fill properties of categories and
concepts
Figure 4.2: Illustrating the iterative Grounded Theory Method research process
However, the confusion and ambiguity researchers may face from dealing with
codes, categories, and concepts when moving between data collection and data analysis,
which could render endless and meaningless notions at times, are not able to be depicted
in a general figure as Figure 4.2. The research process progresses in such a way that I was
guided by initial data and later leads from data and subsequently builds concepts and
eventually a theory. The theoretical pursuit in the course of research process depends on
a combination of the researcher’s purpose of research and where the leads from data guide
researcher to fill gaps in explaining relationships between categories and between
concepts. The systematic Grounded Theory Method research process is made possible
79
with a set of rigorous, systematic and flexible research tools or procedures. These will be
discussed in the next chapter.
4.6 Considerations in Practice
In practice, the amount of literature prior to data collection and analysis has
received different treatments among Grounded Theory Method researchers. The
originators contend that the literature review should start only after data analysis (Glaser
& Strauss, 1967; Glaser, 1978). Some scholars advocate strictly against the use of
interview protocols or extensive review of literature (Holton, 2007), some agree with this
view but perhaps practise it less strictly or more flexibly in order to fulfil certain
requirements as a literature review is seen as a must in fund and research proposal
application (Stern, 2007). Others acknowledge the need to understand “the current
parameters of the (theoretical) conversation” that one hopes to enter (Lempert, 2007:
254). Bryant and Charmaz (2007a) concludes that a balance needs to be struck between
reliance on the literature to provide the framework to start with and having a level of
understanding to provide an orientation. Following Charmaz (2006, 2014) and Lempert
(2007), the use of literature in the present study is necessary to prevent reinventing the
wheel, and to narrow down the focus in keeping with a productive timeline, while
sensitising concepts and general disciplinary perspectives before constructing research
questions.
The question of credibility or validity of data is bound to arise. Different scholars
have different opinions about this. The originators of Grounded Theory, Glaser and
Strauss (1967: 4) believe that “[t]heory based on data can usually not be completely
refuted by more data or replaced by another theory. Since it is too intimately linked to
data, it is destined to last despite its inevitable modification and reformulation”. Corbin
80
feels more comfortable with the use of the term credibility to indicate findings are
trustworthy instead of validity and reliability (Cobin & Strauss, 2008: 301-302) as they
are thought to carry with them many quantitative implications. The present study is
aligned with the view shared by grounded theorists who believe that each method
deserves its own set of judgment criteria (e.g. Charmaz, 2006; Corbin & Strauss, 2008),
Grounded Theory Method has its own way of guiding researchers to scrutinise their data,
checking their data again and again by comparing codes and concepts, either double-
checking or cross-checking. As Charmaz (2006: 47) puts it, “[c]oding impels us to make
our participants’ language problematic to render an analysis of it. Coding should inspire
us to examine hidden assumption in our own use of language as well as that of our
participants”. Data checking for credibility or validity is also aided by memo-writing as
researchers record their honest interaction with data and integrate the memos in the
process of theoretical conceptualisation.
The discussions on verification or validation or the like are common to all
qualitative and quantitative studies. This thesis follows Bryant and Charmaz (2007a: 19)
who acknowledge that independent testing for validation of theory, if one is not talking
about testing for theorising (i.e. how theorising can be better improved), can be
“problematic” for Grounded Theory Method “because the method itself depends on
coterminous data gathering, analysis, and conceptual development”. Bryant and Charmaz
(2007) also cite from Reichertz (2007) who contends that the outcome of abductive
inference can never be verified, however extensive the testing may be, and who instead
sees truth claims as at best provisional. If followed accordingly, the Grounded Theory
Method research process engages researchers in going back to data and participants,
looking for new data and sampling further for concepts when something triggers
researchers to question the fit between data and what emerge from data, namely codes,
categories, concepts or theory. This part of self-checking or self-verification by
81
comparison or further sampling for concepts is not restricted to a particular stage in
research process but is on the go. The nature of the verification of a study employing
Grounded Theory Method lies in the explicit systematic checks and refinements
throughout the research journey (Charmaz, 2006, 2014).
4.7 Applications of Grounded Theory Method
Although Grounded Theory Method has only been introduced for less than fifty
years, it became widely used as a qualitative methodology in the late 1980s (Bryant &
Charmaz, 2007a: 2). Its application is seen in various fields, including exploring different
phenomena in the health research or industry (e.g. Chiovitti & Piran, 2003), information
technology (e.g. Urquhart, 2007) and, as Birks and Mills (2011) observe, in two growing
fields: social justice (e.g. Charmaz, 2011; Edwards & Jones, 2009) and indigenous
research methodologies (e.g. Bainbridge, 2009; Day & Nolde, 2009).
The use of Grounded Theory in language-related studies is feasible if we refer to
works in social studies that employ Grounded Theory Method though its potential is yet
to be explored or utilised by more researchers in language-related fields. Pitawanakwat
(2009) is one language-related study that employs Grounded Theory Method, though
overlapping with the research area of indigenous research. Pitawanakwat (2009) is
especially relevant to the present research area as it employs Grounded Theory Method
to look at the Anishinaabe language revitalisation in Manitoba and Ontario. Via long and
in-depth interviews and using constant comparison method, following Corbin and Strauss
(2008)’s approach, participants’ motivations, methods and mobilisation strategies are
explored to understand how Indigenous language revitalisation movements contribute to
decolonisation and self-determination.
82
Bainbridge (2009) employs Constructivist Grounded Theory to construct an
ecological model to approach and conceptualise the Australian Aboriginal women’s
empowerment. The core category identified, performing aboriginality, encompasses
Aboriginal women’s concerns towards carving a meaningful life and fulfilling perceived
responsibilities as Aboriginal women. The proposed model has practical implications for
improving the quality of life among Aboriginal women via policy-making decisions that
resonate with their ways of knowing, doing and being.
Another linguistic-related dissertation that has employed Grounded Theory,
though using Indigenous Action Research as its main research strategy, is Councellor
(2010). Constructionist Grounded Theory (Charmaz, 2000, 2008; Seaman, 2008) is
integrated with an existing framework, Action Research, to enrich Councellor’s data
analysis in documenting Kodiak Alutiiq-speaking research participants’ voice in their
heritage language revitalisation efforts.
Denzin (2007) discusses how by employing Grounded Theory Method, the
Indigenous Grounded Theory research is, quoting from Smith (2005: 89, here from
Denzin, 2007), “carried out by indigenous scholars, in and for indigenous communities,
using the principles of indigenous inquiry.” It is also noted that Grounded Theory Method
allows researchers to evaluate research by participant-driven criteria where “a primary
goal is the compassionate understanding of another’s moral position” (Bishop, 1998: 203,
cited here from Denzin, 2007: 457). Characteristics like these make Grounded Theory
Method a suitable approach to be drawn upon in the present study.
It is observed that Grounded Theory Method is not widely used in the local
academic scene. The employment of Grounded Theory in Malaysian context, though not
necessarily done by Malaysians, can be found in works such as Birks (2007), a Grounded
Theory study of nurses in Malaysian Borneo, and Loy (2010), a Grounded Theory study
of Malaysian Chinese family firms. The present study will be an addition to studies that
83
employ Grounded Theory in Malaysian context, especially in the field of linguistics in
which Grounded Theory is underused.
4.8 Summary
This chapter introduces how the theoretical approach of the present study came to
be decided, the development of Grounded Theory Method, the major orientations
underlying Grounded Theory Method, an overview of Grounded Theory Method,
considerations in practice and applications of Grounded Theory Method. The next chapter
looks at how Constructivist Grounded Theory (Charmaz, 2006, 2014) is drawn upon in
the research procedures of the present study.
84
CHAPTER 5: METHODS
5.1 Introduction
Chapter 4 presents the broad philosophical underpinnings of Grounded Theory
Method and Constructivist Grounded Theory. It also discusses how it has come to be
recognised that, even with different epistemological underpinnings, basic Grounded
Theory guidelines such as coding, comparative methods, memo-writing, and sampling
for theory development are neutral (Bryant & Charmaz, 2007a; Charmaz, 2006). This
chapter presents how data collection and data analysis of this research proceeded by
drawing upon Constructivist Grounded Theory (Charmaz, 2006, 2014).
As introduced in Chapter 1, the purpose and research questions of this study were
set in a general way in the beginning of research: (i) to explore MPC language
revitalisation efforts that are initiated from the grassroots level and (ii) the recipient
community’s reaction towards these efforts and possible future efforts. The present
research was motivated by (i) a perceived gap between bottom-up MPC language
revitalisation efforts and PS MPC-speaking group members’ reactions towards the efforts
and (ii) the gap in literature on language revitalisation efforts of MPC. As presented in
Chapter 1, the initial main leading research questions were:
i. What are the bottom-up MPC language revitalisation efforts?
ii. What are the reactions of the PS MPC-speaking group members towards
MPC language revitalisation?
85
Based on theoretical conceptualisation, the revised main research questions were
then reworded to:
i. How is MPC relevance managed by negotiating and constructing its
meanings against the backdrop of the language revitalisation process and
the wider multilingual and post-colonial backdrop?
ii. What are the implications of such managing heritage language relevance on
language planning?
5.2 Pre-data collection
5.2.1 Research Participants
Research participants of the present study are MPC-speaking group members
involved in language revitalisation efforts and PS MPC-speaking group members on the
recipient side of these efforts (see Table 5.1 for a list of research participants).
86
Table 5.1: List of research participants
No Identifier Sex Age (at the time of

interview)
1 A1 M 57
2 A2 M 63
3 A3 F 50
4 A4 M 64
5 A5 F 69
6 A6 F 44
7 A7 M 58
8 A8 M 81
9 A9 F 59
10 B1 F 52
11 B2 M 24
12 B3 M 26
13 B4 F 9
14 B5 F 67
15 B6 F 67
16 B7 F 10
17 B8 F 23
18 B9 M 22
19 B10 F 52
20 B11 F 44
21 B12 M 11
22 B13 F 13
23 B14 F 54
24 B15 M 12
25 B16 M 22
26 B17 F 65
27 B18 M 17
28 B19 M 55
29 B20 M 22
30 B21 F 19
31 B22 F 24
32 B23 F 73
33 B24 F 47
34 B25 F 52
35 B26 F 47
36 B27 F 14
37 B28 M 15
38 B29 F 13
39 B30 M 60
40 B31 F 17
41 B32 M 21
87
As explained in Chapter 4, although this thesis employs the term research
participants as used in Constructivist Grounded Theory, research participants are seen as
the experts or language consultants who co-construct knowledge in a substantive area
with the researcher. To gather information on the MPC language revitalisation process
cycle in which group members’ experiences are at the core of research, exploratory
samples or approaching research participants to understand relatively unexplored topics
are more relevant, compared to representative samples associated with matching a
population in terms of variables (Descombe, 2010).
Purposeful sampling, also known as purposive sampling, is employed in the
selection of interviewees, where researchers intentionally select individuals and sites that
are relevant and can provide knowledge or experience about a research topic to help
understand the central phenomenon and develop a detailed understanding (Creswell,
2012; Descombe, 2010). The strategies of purposeful sampling that are useful to the
present study are homogeneous sampling which “purposefully samples individuals or
sites based on membership in a subgroup that has defining characteristics” and snowball
sampling to “locate people or sites to study” via recommendations by participants
(Creswell, 2012:207-209).
Having stayed in or near the PS prior to this research helped establish friendship
and the chance to be accommodated by a local family for this research. When data
collection began for this thesis, a warm and helpful family from the PS provided
accommodation and help through the connection of the family’s late first daughter who
assisted in the MPC research projects. The same family had also provided accommodation
in one project fieldtrip while in other trips, the accommodation plan followed the project
team members’, usually renting a place just footsteps away from the PS. During the data
collection for the present study, though I am not a MPC speaker, basic European
Portuguese learned during undergraduate studies became handy in picking up some
88
vocabulary while spending time in the PS for, among others, joining or making
conversations as an outsider, and learning MPC basic greetings and vocabulary. Many
times the showing of understanding certain MPC words, expressions or even content of
conversations had helped open the door to more conversations, or at least more smiles
and nods. Fieldworkers would agree that in practice, time spent building rapport,
friendship, and trust with people is a major part of research experience that would
contribute to the overall understanding of a research topic.
Though the focus of this research looks at actions and meaning-making as
expressed via linguistic resources, observation in informal settings complements the
research procedures, as observation allows one to learn the implicit way or structure of
life (Blommaert & Dong, 2010; Briggs, 1986). It is also common that in unrecorded or
informal conversations that information pertaining to social and political situations would
be revealed, the same goes for personal thoughts and judgements. In some cases, the role
of researcher and research participant could be reversed and there would be questions
posed on the possibilities on further MPC language efforts, including language policy on
mother tongue education in schools and how the role of an institution could help in MPC
language efforts. Being invited or welcomed to language revitalisation efforts, including
MPC language class and MPC-speaking group session, or family events and cultural
activities, added depth to the understanding of the experience of the PS MPC-speaking
group members.
English was used as the medium of interaction. The concerns about whether using
English instead of MPC in conversations would pose any challenges such as the
understanding of questions posed soon became unnecessary a few months after being
involved in fieldwork for other projects since 2011. This is because English is one of the
MPC-speaking group members’ family languages, though similar to other communities
in a multilingual context, there is a localised English variety spoken by the community in
89
study. Other than sharing the purpose of research with participants, research participants
were reminded that they could ask questions and pause the recording whenever necessary.
When the participants did not understand the questions, mainly because some ideas such
as language revitalisation and varieties of language were new to them, examples were
drawn from what they might find easier to relate to.
5.2.2 Core Setting
This thesis focuses on MPC-speaking group members in Malacca - those who stay
in or near the PS, except for the case of a language activist who grew up in Malacca but
stays outside Malacca currently and also the case of another prominent figure in the
culture scene who recently moved out of the PS to a neighbourhood of around thirty
minutes of car drive away. The PS is a natural choice for this study as this is where MPC
is spoken by active users (Baxter, 2012) though their proficiency and frequency may vary.
It is also where cultural events close to the heart of group members can be found. In the
present study, only language efforts initiated by MPC-speaking group members for MPC
are documented although there have been non-group-members who have contributed to
the language revitalisation efforts (e.g. Baxter, 1988; Baxter & De Silva, 2004). This
decision was made based on observations in previous fieldtrips after coming across the
MPC-speaking group members who have been trying to revitalise their heritage language
in their own way. As almost all the MPC-speaking group members’ language
revitalisation efforts target the PS group members, it follows that the voice of the MPC-
speaking group members are sought regarding the language revitalisation efforts.
5.2.3 Ethics
Consent (Appendix A) was obtained from individual research participants for the
data to be used for educational purposes and for the conversations to be audio-recorded
90
after informing them about the objective and nature of this research, apart from not
pressuring research participants and not bringing harm to them, as generally advocated in
ethical guidelines (Crowley, 2007). The considerations in choosing a theoretical approach
are elaborated in Chapter 4. The decision made was based on how via a theoretical
approach, I could listen to the research participants, continue the collaborative nature of
research as started in fieldwork prior to the present study, and conduct research in an
ethical and productive manner. These considerations manifest not only in the theoretical
approach chosen, but also in my positioning as a researcher throughout the conduct of
research and how the thesis was written. Chapter 4 also explains how research participants
of the present study were in effect similar to how language consultants and experts are to
language documentation and fieldwork researchers. Although interview was employed as
the primary research tool, the nature of the interview in effect resembled structured
conversations, instead of the rigid structure interviews might be associated with. This
explains in most parts of the present study, the term conversation is used in place of
interview, unless it is indicated otherwise.
5.3 Data Collection
Prior to starting this doctoral research, experience in fieldwork gained as team
member for two projects contributed to the research paradigm and process of the present
study, in terms of ethical considerations (as discussed above and in Chapter 4), making
contacts with PS MPC-speaking group members, research tools and technical aspects.
The aims of projects previously involved are language and culture documentation (Pillai,
2013) and language use and family language policy (Pillai, Soh & Kajita, 2014).
Following the projects’ experience, the purpose of the present research was motivated by
observation on the field related to awareness towards and participation in the bottom-up
MPC language revitalisation efforts.
91
41 interviews or conversations as referred to in the present study were conducted
from July to October, 2013. A total of 41 questionnaire forms were completed and 41
conversations, totalling up to 23 hours and 35 minutes of recordings, were conducted. 34
conversations were audio-recorded with the consent of research participants, while for
seven conversations, the participants did not consent to be recorded or the circumstances
in which the conversing sessions were held did not allow the conversations to be recorded.
Similar to how data collections were done in batches over four months, transcriptions
were also done in batches over six months.
For the initial and following data collections, key points in conducting guided
conversations as advocated by Charmaz (2006: 25-37) are referred to, including posing
open-ended or semi-structured, focused, non-judgmental and directed questions (consider
direct questioning and redirecting inquiry when necessary) in an open-minded manner,
staying attuned to participants’ statements, and making the best out of the flexibility of
conversations instead of interrogating. Design of the initial coding data collection
procedures was done with prior exposure and reference to the existing literature (e.g.
Grenoble & Whaley, 2006; Hinton, 2001) and theses (e.g. Christensen, 2001;
Pitawanakwat, 2009).
Here, there may be questions raised about the extent of pre-assumptions that
would influence the research design of the present study as dissertations and literature
were referred to since Glaser (1998: 94) cautions against preconceiving aspects of data
collection including interview guides. The present study is aligned with Charmaz (2006:
36, 129-132) who contends that the focus of the interview and the specific questions are
influenced by a more constructivist or objectivist approach (see Section 4.4); the former
approach is taken in the present study and the reflexivity strand in Constructivist
Grounded Theory was interwoven into the research process. The need to be aware of the
assumptions and perspectives that may be imported into interview questions, and the
92
types of questioning for different topics such as direct questioning or open-ended
questions holds a crucial part throughout data collection in the present study. This
research takes the same position as Lempert (2007: 254) who contends that using
literature does not define one’s research and her pragmatic considerations in using
literature throughout her research process as literature helps researchers to identify gaps
and directions. I also take cue from Birks and Mills (2011: 24) who point out that perhaps
the greatest advantage of using literature at an early stage of research is one gets to learn
how Grounded Theory is employed by other researchers. In sum, using literature helped
me stay engaged with the present research area while being focused on an exploration
leading up to theoretical pursuit of concepts and categories.
The present study employs survey (Part I) and conversation (Part II) where the
latter is the main research instrument. To answer the research questions, data to be
collected are from (i) those involved in language revitalisation efforts (Category A) and
(ii) those on the recipient side of the language revitalisation efforts (Category B). There
are two parts to the initial data collection. Part I is a survey about the participants’
language background (e.g. access to MPC when they were growing up, where they use
MPC). In consistence with the philosophical and methodological underpinnings of
Constructivist Grounded Theory, Part II is a conversation guided by mostly open-ended
questions; the last few questions which are not open-ended but related to language
revitalisation can be seen as a continuation of the survey (Part I). The reason the questions
that are not open-ended are included in the end of the conversation, instead of the Part I
survey, is due to considerations on the relevance of the questions: this was to allow
participants to understand language revitalisation on their own terms before they were
asked about it. Part I survey and Part II guiding questions for conversations are presented
in Appendix B.
93
Questions may be raised about the relevance of the questionnaire in this study.
The relevance of Part I Language Survey may seem irrelevant at an early stage. However,
other than surveying perceptions and thoughts on language-related matters, information
about participants was used to add dimensions, perspectives and depth to theoretical
conceptualisation as (i) properties and consequences of major concepts and categories
and (ii) relationships between concepts, categories and codes were pursued and identified.
As for the decision on the guided conversation, it was made based on how it could be
“open-ended yet directed, shaped yet emergent, and paced yet unrestricted” (Charmaz,
2006: 28). Charmaz also notes that in an interview (guided conversation in the present
study), the researcher assumes more direct control over the construction of data than other
methods such as survey and observation. This allows participants’ views to be elicited
towards language revitalisation efforts in a more directed manner while allowing
flexibility and reflexivity on my part. This is especially important in the exploration of a
more complex and subtle phenomenon (Charmaz, 2006; Corbin & Strauss, 2008;
Descombe, 2010; Morse, 2007).
5.4 Data Analysis
As discussed and demonstrated throughout the present study, the research process
of a Grounded Theory Method study is naturally part of the outcome of research, due to
its inductive and iterative nature (Chapter 4). This section explicates the research
procedures in data analysis, in consistence with the nature and the common key features
of a Grounded Theory Method study. It must be reminded that although the presentation
of the data analysis may appear to be a linear process due to the need to describe research
processes in a particular sequential and logical order in writing, the actual research
process was not a linear one (see Chapter 4).
94
5.4.1 Initial Coding
The initial coding process may start as soon as the first piece of data is available.
However, in the present study, as it is more convenient and efficient to have a few
structured conservations for every field trip, recordings were listened to after each
conversation was done to grasp the general concepts while checking (i) if the questions
needed to be further modified or edited and (ii) if there was anything in need of
clarification or confirmation with participants. The present study follows how “coding
full interview transcriptions gives you ideas and understandings that you otherwise miss”
(Charmaz, 2006: 70). The choice of transcription convention was based on the purpose
of this research: approaching experiences and expressivity regarding a part of social life
where the focus is on the content of the conversations. Since the mechanics of speech are
not the focus of this research, it follows that a naturalised approach or a verbatim
depiction of speech (e.g. Schegloff 1997), in which every utterance is to be transcribed in
as much detail as possible, is not required. This is consistent with the works of grounded
theorists which are observed to have employed a more denaturalised approach in
transcribing data (e.g. Charmaz, 2000).
The advantage of coding as soon as after the first conversation was considered as
researchers can then immediately identify whether questions need to be modified at an
earlier stage to accommodate any emerging needs. However, the concern of whether
questions designed were appropriate in terms of ethical considerations and the general
direction of research was overcome in the beginning of data collection. This is because
prior field experience and other interactions with the PS MPC-speaking group members
in previous fieldworks for other projects at different times throughout a time span of 18
months equipped me with prior knowledge such as the more appropriate way of posing
95
questions. Being aware of the prior knowledge that might have been brought into the
present research, as inevitable in any Grounded Theory research (Bryant & Charmaz,
2007a: 19-20; Lempert, 2007: 245-264), and some reasoning against using preconceived
“problem statement, interview protocols or extensive review of literature” (Holton, 2007:
269), prior knowledge and literature were drawn upon cautiously in designing and
conducting the present research (as discussed in Chapter 4).
Coding is the process of categorising segments of data with a short name,
simultaneously summarising and accounting for each piece of data. It is said to generate
the bones of analysis (Charmaz, 2006, 2014). Although the earlier Grounded Theory rules
prescribed that initial coding be done without preconceived concepts in mind (Glaser,
1978, 1992), it is gaining recognitions that researchers are equipped with prior ideas and
skills (Birks & Mills, 2011; Charmaz, 2006; Clarke, 2005; Lempert, 2007). Codes emerge
as the data are selected, separated and sorted to begin an analytic accounting of them. It
is essential to ask the following questions during initial coding, as Charmaz (2006: 47)
advocates:
i. What is this data a study of? (Glaser, 1978: 57; Glaser & Strauss, 1967)
ii. What does the data suggest? Pronounce? (Writer’s note: What does the data
claim to be?)
iii. From whose point of view?
iv. What theoretical category does this specific datum indicate? (Glaser, 1978)
There are also a few tips that are referred to when coding data such as working
quickly, preserve actions by using gerunds following Glaser (1978), making your codes
fit the data rather than forcing the data to fit them (Charmaz, 2006).Whether one codes
96
word-by-word, line-by-line, or incident-by-incident, constant comparative methods
(Glaser & Strauss, 1967) is used to establish analytic distinction by comparing data with
data to identify similarities and differences.
Memo-writing, “the pivotal intermediate step between data collection and writing
drafts of papers,” is practised from the beginning of the research (Charmaz, 2006: 72;
2014). Grounded Theory Method researchers are encouraged to write memos freely and
about anything throughout the coding process to help them organise thoughts, and decide
further ideas and categories or properties to pursue. This is especially necessary during
theoretical sampling and refining theoretical conceptualisation at a later stage. The
advantages of memo-writing are abundant such as sparking ideas, directing further
coding, and preventing forcing data into extant concepts and theories since memos force
researchers to reflect honestly. Equally important, it helps researchers to find their own
voice and increase confidence and competence (Charmaz, 2006, 2014; Lempert, 2007).
Based on coding attempts and readings, it was realised that the computing
software that was decided to be used in this study, NVivo, had to take a backseat.
Attempts to code in NVivo have, similar to experiences shared by Gorra (2011, here from
Birks & Mills, 2011: 101-103) and Urquhart (2013), led to a point where having too many
initial codes while coding line-by-line became unmanageable and affected the process
that followed. The present study agrees with Urquhart (2013) who thinks that the
advantages of computing software lie primarily in data management, rather than data
analysis. It is recognised that computing software can help researchers do a good job
when the researchers are coding with pre-conceived themes or categories though this type
of coding is not in consistency with any Grounded Theory approach. It was decided that
the data of the present study could be better focused on in the progressing from the raw
97
data to the abstraction of concepts and categories by coding with a more manual manner,
in word documents.
To demonstrate the application of Constructivist Grounded Theory to the case at
hand, illustrations of the different research procedures are presented in the rest of this
chapter. Table 5.2, 5.3, 5.4 and 5.5 show excerpts of line-by-line initial coding of four
Category A conversations. How these initial codes play out will follow in the following
sections.
Table 5.2: Excerpts of conversation with A1
Losing artefacts (heritage) And there are a lot of artefacts still around, so
these artefacts are also slowly disappearing.
Talking about artefacts’ values It’s… it’s like… like those artefacts of religious
value, some artefacts of antique value. They’re
slowly going away. In fact, many has gone
Commenting on nyonya baba already. See like the Nyonya Baba, they have
being more organised uh… I would say, a more organized… a more
Referring to the straits-born organised uhm… you know, they’re more
museums and intact artefacts organized. They have a… a, you know,
Comparing to MPEs museums, not private museums but they have all
Not having a proper museum the artefacts all quite intact. Where else we…
Talking about taking granted of we… we don’t because we have kind of taken for
heritage-related things granted, you know, uh… on all these things.
Talking about traditional food, Uh… in fact the… the… the… the… the… the…
festivals the story goes on we have our own unique
traditional cakes, the way of uh… preparing uh…
food, huh…. Our… our festivals, um. So there’s
so many things that like… like I said will…
Having unique food, festivals will… will keep us, you know, unique. Our…
Having a unique language like I said, we have traditional cakes, we have
Keeping MPEs unique traditional games, we have, you know… even
Wanting to have more (heritage- the… like I said, the conversation is so unique.
related things) So that is actually like I say, uh… the things that
Willing to talk about MPE and keep us… or especially in my case, keep me
MPC wanting, you know, to… to… to have more. To
try, you know… to give time to people like you,
Proposing a resource centre in… in… in interviews. And hopefully like I say,
Having the idea for years some form of assistance can come. You know,
Allowing others a place for where… where… where, OK, let’s set up a
getting to know MPE and MPC resource centre. Because this idea, of resource
centre, has been dangling for many years but
anybody coming to the settlement, they don’t
know where to start, unless they have a contact.
98
Table 5.3: Excerpts of conversation with A3
Having a vision But we... I mean we have a vision la. Now we’re
Trying their best to document trying our best to get all these words done then
words and maybe getting maybe we’ll get say, people from Portugal, one
interested people to help write a or two who’s interested to know about our work
book or dictionary so maybe they can come and sit with us and help
Helping children to learn MPC us to write a book or, you know, maybe a
Hoping that their goals can be dictionary, uh. So with that, maybe we can start
achieved helping our children here who don’t speak that
language. Hopefully la, mmm... hopefully we
achieve our goals. Mmm...
Talking about aim Yes, that is our aim actually. Because we... we
Explaining their aim started off just uh... coming together and
speaking about the language, huh, talking about it
Helping children learn MPC and then how we can help these children
nowadays. Because with English and Bahasa
Children not speaking MPC being taught in school, children are not speaking
Having children not knowing this language now. I can say about 30 or 40
MPC percent of them they don’t know the language.
Being determined to do Mm, so I think it’s time that we do something
something to help children learn about it. If not, the language will just die off. We
Expressing worries about are getting older, huh, if we die with what we
language dying off have, with our knowledge and not uh... giving the
Expressing worries on aging knowledge to the young ones then the language
generation will just die off.
Dying with knowledge and
language
Table 5.4 : Excerpts of conversation with A5
Wondering why MPC was not And... it started as a concern for me that “Why is
written down my language not written down?”, “Why is the
Comparing MPC to English and English language written down so well?”, “Why
(Bazaar Malay) is the Malay language starting to develop and...
and uh... when it was only Bazaar Malay.” And if
that can develop, so also can my uh... [(xxx)]
Comparing MPC to Chinese Kristang language be developed and why? We
dialects were speaking it and... and just like the Chinese,
Wondering why Chinese dialects like the Hokkiens and all that. You didn’t have it
survive without being written written down as well but you are still speaking it.
down So I said, “Yeah, if they continued speaking it,
Lasting forever if spoken maybe it will last forever.”
99
Table 5.5 : Excerpts of conversation with A7
Talking about objective of LR The objective is uh... because... as I said uh...

Having a fear factor there’s a fear factor involved with that because
Backing with experience uh... I have seen, I have felt, and they are
testimonies that... that can back... back this uh...
Experiencing language erosion generally that the... the language is slowly
Slipping language eroding.
Neglecting the language Ah, it’s... it’s slipping away because we tend to
Emphasising English neglect it, we tend to uh... emphasize more on
Using English and Malay in English and the students tend to sort of uh... uh...
school be more exposed to... to the... language in school,
Relating to environment that is uh... Bahasa Malaysia and uh... of course
Having less domains to use MPC English. So, the environment to speak the
language is getting more and more, what do you
Not realising the decreased call it... uh... confined now, you know... Less
domains and language use opportunities and people don’t seem to realize
that, even if they realize also, they feel that...
Realising and brushing it off “What’s the big deal? So what’s so important?”
5.4.2 Focused Coding and Categorising
Focused coding refers to “using the most significant and/or frequent earlier codes
to sift through large amounts of data”, and based on frequency of certain codes or making
explicit what seem implicit earlier, it “requires decisions about which initial codes make
the most analytic sense to categorise your data indecisively and completely” (Charmaz,
2006: 57). It give rises to more directed, selective, and conceptual codes than word-by-
word, line-by-line, and incident-by-incident coding at the initial coding phase (Glaser,
1978). In the present case, after coding a piece of data line-by-line, the next step involved
identifying the most significant and/or the most frequent codes and compiling them into
a table of potential focused codes, and grouping initial codes under them as properties
and dimensions. The next piece of data was then coded while exploring if there were any
most salient codes that were similar to or different from the initial and focused codes in
the table of potential focused codes and initial codes, in consistence with the constant
comparative method.
100
The memo-writing process at this stage is still similar to the initial memo writing
process in many ways. However, at this stage, researchers have a better idea about what
their data is about as the emerging codes lead to emerging categories. Researchers make
further comparisons including comparing people, categories, subcategories, and the entire
analysis with existing literature or the ruling ideas in a field. As a code is raised to a
category, the following points were referred to (Charmaz, 2006: 92):
i. Define the category
ii. Explicate the properties of the category
iii. Specify the conditions under which the category arises, is maintained, and
changes
iv. Describe its consequences
v. Show how this category relates to other categories
The initial codes are grouped into potential focused codes, as seen in Table 5.6.
The selected initial codes in Table 5.6 imply or show a certain level of concerns, worries
or fear, leading to a tentative focused code, Having worries and fear. Focused codes can
be raised from initial codes or renamed to encompass the related initial codes after the
initial codes are studied. Again, the process of initial coding to focused coding is not a
linear one. Instead, the iterative nature of data analysis allows researchers to multiple-
check codes and relationship between codes and compare them across the interviews,
making it a natural way of verifying findings (Charmaz, 2024; Urquhart, 2013).
101
Table 5.6: From initial codes to a focused code
Grouping related initial Studying codes Focused code

codes together
Interview with A1
Talking about taking
granted of heritage-related Implies concerns
things
Interview with A3
Expressing worries about Having worries and
language dying off fear,
Expressing worries on later refined as
aging generation Shows worries channelling inner
feelings and needs (the
addition of the latter is a
Interview with A5 result of combining
Wondering why MPC was with another focused
not written down Shows concerns code)
Interview with A7
Having a fear factor
Shows fear
5.4.3 Theory building
Theory building is not a liner process but an iterative one, similar to the research
process as discussed and illustrated in Chapter 4 (Figure 4.1). It can start from the very
first piece of data, in keeping with the emergent nature of Grounded Theory as researchers
employ tools or procedures including coding, constant comparative analyses, memo-
writing, and theoretical sampling to conceptualise a theory.
Every tool or procedure in a Grounded Theory approach has its function to serve
in theory-building and the systematic checking and refinements. Table 5.7 illustrates an
example of a theory building process, from how the data analysis proceeded from the raw
data, initial coding, focused coding to the emerging category before a theme was finally
102
decided. Table 5.7 is an extension from the initial codes that are presented in Table 5.2,
5.3, 5.4 and 5.5 and the grouping of initial codes under a focused code in Table 5.6.
Table 5.7: Examples from a theory building process
Interview excerpts Initial codes Focused code, Category Theme

later raised to be a
sub-category
Being How is MPC
“We are motivated to relevance
getting older, Having revitalise managed by
Expressing
huh, if we die worries, fear; MPC negotiating and
concerns about
with what we later refined constructing its
aging generation
have, with our as language meanings
knowledge and revitalisation against the
not uh... giving as backdrop of the
the knowledge channelling language
to the young inner feelings revitalisation
ones then the and needs process and the
language will wider
just die off.” multilingual and
post-colonial
context?
“... it started
as a concern
for me that
“Why is my Wondering why
language MPC was not
not written written down
down?”
“... there’s a
fear factor
involved with
that because Having a fear
uh... I have factor
seen, I have
felt.... the
language is
slowly
eroding.”
103
Once the data analysis started taking some forms, the emerging leads and puzzling
questions pointed to the need for further actions through theoretical sampling, such as
going back to the data, re-examining codes and categories or drawing from literature as
data for adding properties, dimensions and contexts, and to use literature as an ideological
site to claim, locate, evaluate and defend position or argument (Charmaz, 2006, 2014). I
also followed Urquhart (2013)’s idea to start compiling some of the literature that one can
relate to, to contradict, confirm or extend existing theories once one has entered the realm
of theoretical conceptualisation as it involves thinking about the relationship between the
categories found in the data.
Excerpts from my memos are presented in Table 5.8 to show my trends of
thoughts as I was exploring and conceptualising relationships between the emerging
codes, categories, concepts and the final core category or theme. Before the substantive
model (Chapter 6) was finalised, I had drafted more than 10 diagrams of relationships in
my memos. As introduced in in previous sections, writing memos freely and honestly
helps researchers to clarify what is happening in the field and to refine conceptualisation
as certain categories are adopted as theoretical concepts.
104
Table 5.8: Excerpts from memos
21052014
The tension, the problem... Between taking control or claiming ownership of language
(and heritage?) AND refuting control or disclaiming ownership or rendering control to
others?
I have to look at how participants said things when claiming ownership and when
disclaiming it. This may be the tension and would tell me about the conflict the
community have. This is related to why they have done what they have or have not
done more with or via their language and heritage. For instance, notice how one person
may feel or say things when claiming that MPC is theirs but may feel or say things
differently and redirect the controlling power to others. Does this count as part of
characteristics of a minority community? Is this one category on its own?
Participants' strategies! What are their strategies in claiming, refuting, agreeing with,
etc. something? When it comes to language revitalisation?
01072014
I am taking a step back today and I am going back to my codes since I am still looking
for a better way to conceptualise relationships between codes and categories. I have
grouped the initial codes together previously and have some tentative categories but
somehow I am still looking for better representation or grasp of the data. I seem to have
got more “mechanical” (in Charmaz’s sense) in grouping codes together and the
relationships between the codes and categories seem to be predictable… Something is
missing.
I find two codes speak to me: “reconnecting” and “regenerating interest”. Aren’t these
two codes talking about why the community members have decided to take things into
their own hand and are involved in language revitalisation? The concept of language
revitalisation is not something new, the interest has been there among some people and
the efforts have been on and off, but they have not been accessible for the whole
community. WHY? Is language revitalisation a luxury? Is it something belonging to
the lots who have the privilege to do so? Is my core category reconnecting with
identity/self/heritage/culture through language revitalisation?
25072014
What is my central question or core category? Is it “What does language revitalisation
mean to the MPC speakers”? Or is it “What is the process of the MPC language
revitalisation”? These two questions are interrelated. Both questions will provide
insights on why language revitalisation efforts are or are not getting the response
anticipated (or not)…
105
In contrast with purposeful sampling employed in the initial coding data
collection, theoretical sampling, though bearing some resemblances with purposeful
sampling if we compare the criterion of choosing samples based on what one is looking
to answer, is a different process. As Charmaz (2006: 99) puts it, “initial sampling in
Grounded Theory is where you start, whereas theoretical sampling directs you where to
go”. The purpose of theoretical sampling is to obtain data to help researchers explicate
their emerging categories. It is acknowledged that by moving back and forth between data
collection and data analysis, researchers refine their categories and conceptualisation, and
produce substantive understandings on a chosen topic (see also Voorman & Gut, 2008,
for a similar concept in the cyclical process of their agile corpus creation approach which
encourages researchers to start annotating early to test one’s coding instrument, obtain
guidelines for further corpus annotation from initial smaller corpus and allow any
necessary fine-tuning). Sampling in Grounded Theory Method is in essence different
from other sampling methods in that it is concepts that are being sampled, instead of
numbers or persons, particularly in theoretical sampling.
An important concept that would determine when to terminate theoretical
sampling is theoretical saturation (Glaser & Strauss, 1967; Glaser, 1978, 1998, 2001;
Strauss, 1987). It refers to “the point at which gathering more data about a theoretical
category reveals no new properties nor yields any further theoretical insights about the
emerging Grounded Theory” (Charmaz, 2006: 189). Since the term was first introduced
in 1967, Glaser (2001: 191) has elaborated on theoretical saturation, which is achieved
via “intense property development”, and comments that:
“[o]nce a category is saturated it is not necessary to theoretically sample anymore

to collect data for incident comparisons… once many interrelated categories of
Grounded Theory are saturated, theoretical completeness is achieved for the
particular research” (p.192)
106
The point of saturation in theoretical sampling for the present study was decided
based on how no new concepts and categories could be added to the substantive model in
all data collected, whether collected and examined initially or at a later stage. The memos
written from the start help researchers to clarify what is happening in the field and to
refine conceptualisation as certain categories are adopted as theoretical concepts. The
process of sorting memos allows researchers to work on the theoretical integration of their
categories. Some grounded theorists also encourage creating visual images of emerging
theories as a part of Grounded Theory (Clarke, 2003, 2005; Strauss, 1987; Strauss &
Cobin, 1998). Following the increasing numbers of grounded theorists who use
diagramming to integrate ideas, and to establish the logic of their ordering, Charmaz
(2006, 2014) introduces diagramming: potential options include conceptual map (Clarke,
2003, 2005), conditional or consequential matrix (Strauss & Cobin, 1990, 1998).
5.4.4 Verification
The concept of verification or validity checking is not compulsory and can be
problematic as most grounded theorists believe that each method deserves its own set of
judgment criteria, for reasons discussed in Chapter 4. In general, Grounded Theory
Method has its own way of guiding researchers to scrutinise their data, checking their
data again and again by comparing codes and concepts, either double-checking or cross-
checking. As discussed in Chapter 4, Bryant and Charmaz (2007a: 16) observe how
Grounded Theory is not only an inductive approach, but that the process of abduction is
also intertwined in a Grounded Theory research process, based on their understandings
and interpretations of the originators’ works and on other Grounded Theory researchers’
insights. An important insight is that of Reichertz (2007) who observes how attending to
the process of abduction, the process of considering all possible interpretations of the
107
emerging ideas and concepts, reunites the topics of the logic of discovery and the logic
of validation or justification as both are intertwined and brought into the realm of
methodological consideration. The next section presents the criteria that Grounded
Theory Method researchers can aim for, as proposed by Charmaz (2014).
5.5 Criteria: Credibility, Originality, Resonance and Usefulness
There have been criteria for researchers employing Grounded Theory Method for
researchers. This research refers to Charmaz (2006, 2014)’s criteria that Grounded Theory
studies should aim for (see Table 5.1): credibility, originality, resonance and usefulness.
The criteria of credibility and originality serve as checking points to add breadth and
depth to the research by constantly considering and regrouping relationships between
concepts and categories in conceptualising the experiences of one aspect of social life
among minority group members and situating their experiences in larger contexts. The
criteria of resonance and usefulness guided this thesis in being more practical, both in
conduct and in thesis-writing, as Grounded Theory Method’s roots in Pragmatism suggest
(see Chapter 4), in that their studies should make sense to those whose experiences are
conceptualised. These criteria are introduced in Table 5.9 and will be revisited in the
concluding chapter, Chapter 8.
108
Table 5.9: Criteria researchers can aim for (Charmaz, 2014: 355-357)
Credibility Has your research achieved intimate familiarity

with the setting or topic?; Are the data sufficient to
merit your claims? Consider the range, number,
and depth of observations contained in the data;
Have you made systematic comparisons between
observations and between categories?; Do the
categories cover a wide range of empirical
observations?; Are there strong logical links
between the gathered data and your argument and
analysis?; Has your research provided enough
evidence for your claims to allow the reader to
form an independent assessment – and agree with
your claims?
Originality Are your categories fresh? Do they offer new
insights?; Does your analysis provide a new
conceptual rendering of the data?; What is the
social and theoretical significance of this work?;
How does Grounded Theory challenge, extend or
refine current ideas, concepts and practices?
Resonance Do the categories portray fullness of the studied
experience?; Have you revealed both liminal and
unstable taken-for-granted meanings?; Have you
drawn links between larger collectivities or
institutions and individual lives, when the data are
so indicate?; Does the Grounded Theory make
sense to your participants or people who share their
circumstances? Does your analysis offer them
deeper insights about their lives and worlds?
Usefulness Does your analysis offer interpretations that people
can use in their everyday worlds?; Do your analytic
categories suggest any generic processes?; If so,
have you examined these generic processes for
tacit implications?; Can the analysis spark further
research in other substantive areas?; How does
your work contribute to knowledge? How does it
contribute to making a better world?
5.6 Summary
This chapter presents the research procedures of the present study, based on
considerations on research paradigms and design discussed in Chapter 4, and practice in
consistence with Constructivist Grounded Theory (Charmaz, 2006, 2014). The outcome
of research is presented in the next chapter, in the form of a substantive model to approach
how relevance of MPC is managed.
109
CHAPTER 6: A SUBSTANTIVE MODEL
6.1 Introduction
The starting point of this research is how language is talked about, or more
specifically, how a minority, heritage language and efforts to revitalise it are talked about.
This chapter presents the building of a substantive model to approach the study on MPC
and PS MPC-speaking group members, in the hope of providing fresh insights and a new
way of looking at MPC and PS MPC-speaking group members, as discovered from how
MPC and bottom-up MPC language revitalisation are talked about. This section sets the
tone for the substantive model which is introduced in the next section, and which will
also be revisited in Chapter 7. The proceeding of this chapter reflects the process of
building concepts via a bottom-up approach as guided by Constructivist Grounded
Theory (Chapter 4 and 5). Such a research process moves from a focus on actors and
actions (e.g. what is happening?), to conditions of actions (e.g. how is something
happening?) before leading eventually to the explication of meanings and consequences
of actions (e.g. why is it happening? so what?). The sub-chapters that follow the next
section mirror the piling up of the substantive model as the research progressed.
The past research on MPC and MPC speakers (Chapter 1 and 2) has helped
illuminate on the possible relations between language and identity relevant to the group
in study. Findings up to date have informed us on the social factors and historical
development that have led to language shift and loss (Baxter, 2012; David & Noor, 1999;
Lee, 2011; Nunes, 1996; Sudesh, 2000) and the handful of researches on language and
identity have explored the subject area through the struggles and possible facets of
Portuguese Eurasian or Kristang identities (Fernandis, 2000; O’Neill, 2008; Sarkissian,
1997, 2005) (Chapter 1 and 2). However, maintaining and especially revitalising MPC,
particularly from the perspectives of the MPC-speaking group, remain much to be
discovered, particularly more so when this heritage language is a contact language spoken
110
in a multilingual and postcolonial setting. The focus in studies on what aspects of
language and identity of minority-language-speaking groups have changed or lost inform
much but seem to suggest a lack of agency (in the sense of Duranti, 1997; Kroskrity,
2004), and control on the part of the groups, as might be overlooked and brushed it off as
a given or normal. This is closely linked to how such groups are usually labelled minority
and associated with less privileged social circumstances and livelihood. In addition, the
bottom-up MPC language revitalisation has also not been studied as a social movement;
neither have MPC and MPC speakers been approached from the emotional and socio-
psychological perspective in terms of their experiences, expressivity and strategies in
managing an aspect of their social life, particularly in managing relevance of their
heritage language. As introduced in Chapter 1, the process of managing heritage language
relevance can be related to the basic social process of coping mechanisms, and refers to
the process of keeping one’s heritage language relevant as an aspect of one’s social life
while maintaining other parts of one’s social life and identifications.
The initial plan was to explore the nature and impact of bottom-up revitalisation
efforts but as it turned out during research, not many had participated in or knew much
about the efforts. This also further confirmed prior observation of the lack of response
towards the efforts which was also the motivation of this thesis. To explore the nature and
impact of bottom-up revitalisation effort under such circumstances would involve
evaluating the efforts pre-maturely and this would risk imposing ideas on group members
without understanding their experiences. A more tangible way of looking at the bottom-
up revitalisation efforts then would be to understand group members’ experiences and
make propositions based on data. Such a focus on valuing minority groups’ experiences,
though previously more common in linguistic anthropology research, has increasingly
been taken up by language endangerment and language revitalisation researchers. This
thesis adds to the studies on minority groups’ experiences that have been reported to cross
111
temporal and spatial borders and construct boundaries (see a special edition on
Reconceptualising Endangered Language Communities, Language & Communication
[38], as contributed by, among others, Avineri, [2014], Kroskrity [2014]). By studying
the emotional and socio-psychological experiences of endangered language-speaking
group members with a social basis, it permits us to gain a fuller picture of how salient
features of their existence emerge via managing relevance of an endangered heritage
language and of self in social contexts.
The global and epistemological trends (Chapter 3 and 4) and social, historical and
political development (Chapter 2) have contributed to the overall culture climate of
studying heritage language and heritage language-speaking groups. These have led to
increased attention to minority group members’ experiences, expressivity and dynamics
(in the sense of Dorian, 1993, 1998). Considerable attention has been given to (1) what
and (2) how heritage-language-speaking groups have changed or lost in terms of their
language and identity (e.g. Dorian, 1981; Fishman, 1991, 2001; King, 2001). More
research have thus also contributed to broadening the views on minority and contact
language studies socially (e.g. multilingualism, minority language rights) and
theoretically (e.g. an ecological framework, an evolutionary framework). However, the
notion of talking about language and language revitalisation among the PS MPC-speaking
group members remains a substantive area with much to be explored.
Against the backdrop of the wider multilingual, postcolonial contexts and local
language revitalisation efforts, approaching the notion of talking about language and
language revitalisation among group members allows their explicit actions and meanings
within subjective accounts, and the absence or presence of these in a lesser degree, to be
discovered. Such a discovery allows the implicit actions or processes to be posed larger
questions and made explicit via research procedures in Grounded Theory Methodology
(e.g. theoretical sampling, comparative analysis and interpretive rendering) and manifest
112
in the properties and consequences of a process or category (Charmaz, 2014).
Approaching the present study with a pre-conceived framework may risk masking
implicit actions and meanings, as reasoned by Charmaz (2014). In Charmaz’s studies on
the experiences of people with chronic illness, the raw experiences from a participant’s
perspective fit neither narrative logic nor the comprehensible content of a conventional
format. This means interpreting the experiences of the participants with a pre-conceived
framework then may risk producing work that lacks substance or is unrepresentative or
superficial. As explained in Chapter 4, it takes conversations, rather than structured and
rigid tools to reach down the experiences, expressivity and dynamics of participants, and
to go beyond: (i) the what and how, (ii) what meanings and actions are explicit, not
explicit and those in the middle, and (iii) as well as when, why and how the meanings and
actions emerge. These contribute to a processual analysis of how participants and
researcher co-construct meanings about self and subjective existence in which crucial
features of their existence (in the sense of Charmaz, 2014) and close-to-heart matters
emerge. The co-construction between participants and researcher may be of selective but
nonetheless valorised experiences and expressivity, as Charmaz (2014) argues.
Ultimately, understanding experiences and expressivity fosters analysis of self and
meaning.
The substantive model presented in this chapter approaches PS MPC-speaking
group members’ experience in managing the relevance of their heritage language as part
of their social life. This theme, having emerged from a long process of constant
comparison, questioning and conceptualisation, can be related to the basic social process
of coping strategies (Chapter 4 and 5). A process, as referred to by Grounded Theory
Methodology researchers, generally refers to something that occurs over time and
involves change over time while a basic social process is said to process a social or social
psychological problem from the point of view of continuing social organisation and
113
irrespective of whether it solves the problem, to some degree, it processes it (Glaser,
2005). Coping strategies as referred to in this thesis point generally to how social actors,
through processes of negotiating and constructing, establish relationships, patterns of
behaviours and selfhood. In the quest of a basic social process or central phenomenon as
pursued in a Grounded Theory study (Charmaz, 2006, 2014), there is a general tendency
to progress towards a more abstract and general theory that can be related to other basic
social processes or phenomena. When conceptualising a study employing a Grounded
Theory approach, the maxim of all is data is borne in mind as data, analysis and literature
are interwoven in the outcome of study (Glaser & Strauss, 1967). In line with
Constructivist Grounded Theory, ideas and analytical framework take the centre stage of
the substantive model of managing relevance of heritage language instead of particular
research participants or number of participants. As such, this thesis is written in such a
way that the substantive model is illuminated by statements, events and experience of
research participants. Relevant background of research participants will be brought into
the picture whenever necessary, but to protect their identities, more contexts could not
have been used when presenting excerpts of conversations. Thus, some details have been
deliberately left out, and transcriptions have also been slightly edited. This is because, to
encourage conversations, research participants were promised that their identities would
be kept anonymous as the research site is a place where most people know each other.
6.2 Building a Substantive Model
This section illustrates the building of a substantive model on managing heritage
language relevance which can be used to approach the focus of this thesis, MPC language
revitalisation but it can also be scaled up or down for other MPC-related or group-
member-related studies. Much consideration was given to the presentation of this
substantive model. The final decision made was based on how best to illustrate the
114
substantive model while making it possible for readers to catch a glimpse of the research
process. Considering the research process is part of the research outcome (Charmaz, 2006,
2014), it is believed that the chain of evidence that supports the substantive model can be
better demonstrated and grasped by mirroring the research process. Figure 6.1, to be read
bottom-up (figures enclosed within figure are only for rough illustration purpose, please
refer to each component major discussed below for each clearer illustration), illustrates
the building of the major components of the substantive model of managing heritage
language relevance. These major components will be discussed in the following sections.
As introduced earlier and depicted in Figure 6.1, talking about language in the
context of language revitalisation was the starting point of the present research. The
coding and conceptualising data at this stage proceeded with an initial focus on actions
(what’s and how’s) (see Chapter 5 for research procedures). Eventually meanings of
actions (why’s) either emerged or were made explicit. The categories and sub-categories
that were identified then led to unfolding temporal sequences, as they became linked as
sub-processes of the MPC language revitalisation process cycle, as introduced in Chapter
1 (Charmaz, 2014). The MPC language revitalisation process cycle makes up the first
major component of the substantive model, providing concrete evidences for on-the-
ground experiences and expressivity.
115
Theme Managing relevance of heritage language
Finalising a theme: What are all these part of?
Major Establishing close-to-heart matters, peoplehood

component
Towards aligning with macro settings
Towards aligning with a MPC-speaking heritage

Peoplehood
↑
Language, Way-of-life,
History, Ceremony,
Place/Community
Pushing boundaries: What is the purpose of it all?
Major Situating findings thus far in wider contexts: social, historical, global
component
Representing a part of social life
↑
A part of?
↑
Motivations: The extent of aligning with a self identifying with heritage
↑
Why?
↑
Language revitalisation as a site for doing things with language
To move up: What are the meanings and actions a part of?
Major The continuum of coping strategies

component
Towards self-accommodating
Towards self-differentiating
To move up, pursue implicit actions and meanings
Major Bottom-up MPC language revitalisation process

component (The figure below is only for a rough illustration, see Figure 6.2 for the process
cycle)
1 2
5 3
4
To move up, pursue actions and meanings
Starting Talking about language in the context of language revitalisation

point
Figure 6.1: Building a substantive model (to be read from bottom-up)
116
The meanings of actions that had emerged provided leads (i.e. what were
participants doing in their talks and through their actions?) for pursuing the implicit
actions and processes. Reaching down the implicit actions and processes was made
possible by posing larger questions about them and through the research procedures
which made explicit the properties and consequences of a process or category. The
outcome of the pursuit of implicit actions, processes and meanings constitutes the
continuum of coping strategies in managing heritage language relevance. This continuum,
with towards self-accommodating on one end and towards self-differentiating on the
other, marks the second major component of the substantive model.
After the continuum of coping strategies was developed, there were still gaps and
questions to be addressed as these concern the meanings and conditions of coping
strategies. Going back to the literature and data (both primary and secondary), and
situating the first two major components in wider contexts, it was established that the
micro processes feed back into and are never isolated from the wider contexts. The wider
contexts were found to be multidimensional and the interaction between the contexts had
to be considered. The wider contexts were identified to be social (multilingualism),
historical and political (pre-colonial, colonial, post-colonial, contemporary), and global
(epistemological, ontological). The wider contexts then make up another major
component of the substantive model.
The theoretical conceptualisation would have ended by this stage. The three major
components established thus far were reconciled with a tentative theme which was
identified to revolve around managing heritage relevance, as driven by motivations
behind the extent of aligning with a self identifying with a MPC-speaking heritage. The
three major components, as abstracted from on-the-ground experiences and expressivity,
represent a part of the people’s social life. However, there seemed to be in need of
something which could make the substantive model more complete, to reconcile the
117
salient and dynamics meanings that were discovered or made explicit (as discussed in
Chapter 7).
Boundaries were pushed to consider the purpose of managing heritage language
relevance as identified as the theme that emerged in data. The theoretical pursuit turned
to close-to-heart matters for the people which were re-examined. These close-to-heart
matters can be related to peoplehood. The notion of peoplehood (i.e. what support the
larger sense of identity of people identifying with a group) had been around prior to this
stage but was not fully considered. Though a full range explication of the notion of
peoplehood to the MPC-speaking group members would have to take another doctoral
research, this thesis initiates the possibility of considering peoplehood to speakers whose
heritage language developed and continues to develop in contact language situation. The
matters that are close to the heart of the people that are related to peoplehood and
managing heritage language relevance complement each other in how group members
draw from these close-to-heart matters to keep heritage language relevant, or it can also
be said that these matters manifest in the managing of heritage language relevance. The
close-to-heart matters and peoplehood were then integrated into the substantive model as
another major component. By this, the theme of the substantive model was also finalised:
managing heritage language relevance. The following sections discuss each major
component.
6.3 The MPC Language Revitalisation Process Cycle
The logic of presentation of the MPC language revitalisation process cycle,
visualised in Figure 6.2, follows that of how emerging categories and concepts fill up the
different sub-processes. It is recognised that these sub-processes may and can overlap,
instead of progressing as orderly as depicted in Figure 6.2. The sub-processes constitute
the process of initiating, recruiting, responding to or receiving, and aspiring in language
118
revitalisation efforts. Half of the process cycle in Figure 6.2 is filled up by the sub-
processes of the coping strategy of taking things into own hands (see section 6.3); these
sub-processes are being motivated to revitalise MPC, using available resources and
creating resources and mobilising support, as group members get involved in language
revitalisation efforts. Other coping strategies of managing endangered language relevance
that will be discussed in the next section such as drawing upon temporal experiences and
preferring ambiguity, are employed throughout the language revitalisation process, both
by language revitalisation actors and non-actors. As with other social processes or
movements, motivations are the starting point of the MPC language revitalisation process.
In assessing or reflecting upon any social process or movement, it is essential to go back
to reconsider the motivations. This explains why the MPC language revitalisation is
depicted in a process cycle, starting from motivations and going back to motivations
towards the end of the process cycle.
119
*Sub-processes
of coping
strategy, taking
things into own
*Being hands
motivated to *Using
revitalise available
MPC / Being resources and
motivated to creating
speak, learn resources
MPC
Continuing
with MPC as *Mobilising
heritage and support
identity
Outcome of
efforts
Figure 6.2: The MPC language revitalisation process cycle
Motivations of the MPC language revitalisation process refer to both those of
revitalising MPC, or speaking and learning MPC. Motivations of revitalising MPC are
dealt with firstly while those of speaking and learning MPC are presented lastly in the
MPC language revitalisation process as this order matches how bottom-up language
revitalisation efforts start with motivations of language revitalisation actors and at the end
of the process cycle, the efforts would be received or perceived by group members, with
a range of motivations to speak or learn MPC. In general, the motivations of revitalising
MPC revolve around how group members attempt to connect with their MPC-speaking
heritage, self and group. For those involved in language revitalisation process, they turn
to or chance upon available and accessible resources and mobilise support from their
120
network. Outcomes of the efforts follow, in the hope of leading to intended goals while
some underlying ideologies and tensions would surface. As this thesis unfolds further, it
will be learned that to sustain the efforts and resolve related disconnect or tensions, it is
helpful to go back to the motivations of speaking, learning and revitalising MPC. It is
recognised that in practice, the process could be ad hoc and iterative instead of always
following the order of the process cycle as depicted in Figure 6.2. Based on emerging
categories and concepts that are linked as temporal sequences as part of a larger whole,
this process cycle serves its conceptualisation purpose in the attempt of making sense of
the experience of managing heritage language relevance.
A recap of research participants is necessary (see Section 5.2.1). At the time of
the present study, the language revitalisation efforts initiated by MPC speakers were
found to be a MPC-speaking meet-up group, language classes and compiled or written
materials. Group A research participants are A1, A2 and A3 who are members of the
MPC-speaking meet-up group, A4, A5, A7 and A8 who have contributed to the
community’s language classes, A6 who has published written materials in MPC and A9
who has compiled some recordings intended for sale. Group B research participants are
made up of 32 MPC-speaking group members, mostly staying in or around PS, ranging
from 8 to 80 years old at the time of research.
6.3.1 Being Motivated to Revitalise MPC
Motivations of revitalising MPC presented here are grouped following the
similarity and saliency in them. However, it is recognised and emphasised that a
combination of these internal and external motivations, which can overlap and influence
each other, have accumulated over the years in the overall cultural climate and led to the
rise of awareness on matters related to heritage, ownership and language revitalisation.
The social development and processes locally or internationally in the past would have,
121
along with the input brought about by the past researchers and other outsiders to the MPC-
speaking group in PS, inspired, triggered, motivated or encouraged the growing
awareness on heritage, ownership and language revitalisation. Interaction between group
members and the past, present or future researchers will continue to add to the knowledge-
sharing between each other, whether done directly or indirectly, intentionally or not so.
6.3.1.1 Language revitalisation as channelling inner feelings and needs
The first sub-category sees language revitalisation as channelling inner feelings
and needs, as triggered by (i) the interaction between self and heritage language, and (ii)
how heritage language is positioned and liberates inner feelings and needs, in relation to
self and bigger sense of presence. A combination of inner feelings, needs and personal
interest was recalled by research participants, as demonstrated in the following excerpts.
A3 grew up in Portuguese Settlement and is active in Catechism teaching. A3 expresses
a sense of responsibility to transmit knowledge including MPC to the younger generation
as her age is catching up with her in the following excerpt as how the transmission of
heritage language is related to the bigger sense of existence is demonstrated:
[E6.1, A3]
Mm, so I think it’s time that we do something about it. If not, the language will
just die off. We are getting older, huh, if we die with what we have, with our
knowledge and not uh... giving the knowledge to the young ones then the language
will just die off.
Although MPC has been linguistically described (e.g. Hancock, 1979) before its
grammar and dictionary were compiled (Baxter, 1988; Baxter & De Silva, 2004), a
writing system is not common and widespread to its average speakers. With the advent
of technology, MPC is used in social media and electronic messages but because there is
no systematic spelling convention, people generally write or type as they like or based on
how the words sound. Having started her work in 1990, A5 describes her concern about
122
the lack of a writing system for MPC in the following excerpt as she questioned herself
over the situation of her heritage language compared to other languages:
[E6.2, A5]
And... it started as a concern for me that “Why is my language not written down?”,
“Why is the English language written down so well?”, “Why is the Malay
language starting to develop and... and uh... when it was only Bazaar Malay.” And
if that can develop, so also can my uh... Kristang language be developed and why?
We were speaking it and... and just like the Chinese, like the Hokkiens and all
that. You didn’t have it written down as well but you are still speaking it. So I
said, “Yeah, if they continued speaking it, maybe it will last forever.”
As inner feelings and needs interact with personal interest, motivations can change
or layer up over time. By comparing E6.2 to the following excerpt, E6.3, the development
of A5’s motivations behind her work is demonstrated as her work was seen as a promise
to her late sister in the beginning:
[E6.3, A5]
My elder sister, uh, I told her to write because she was suffering from a kind of
uh… heart problem. I said, “Ok, will you write down how would you translate
like Twinkle, Twinkle Little Star”. So she did all these translations for me, and
that’s why I promised her that I will write a book.
A7’s case continues to demonstrate how heritage language is positioned and
liberates one’s inner feelings and needs. A7 supports language-related activities and puts
in efforts to speak MPC such as when speaking in formal events. In the following excerpt,
A7 talks about how his support for language revitalisation efforts is driven by a fear
factor.
[E6.4, A7]
The objective is uh... because... as I said uh... there’s a fear factor involved (my
emphasis) with that because uh... I have seen, I have felt, and they are testimonies
that... that can back... back this uh... generally that the... the language is slowly
eroding. Ah, it’s... it’s slipping away because we tend to neglect it, we tend to uh...
emphasise more on English and the students tend to sort of uh... uh... be more
exposed to... to the... language in school, that is uh... Bahasa Malaysia and uh... of
course English. So, the environment to speak the language is getting more and
more, what do you call it... uh... confined now, you know... Less opportunities and
people don’t seem to realise that, even if they realise also, they feel that... “What’s
the big deal? So what’s so important?”
123
The sense of self-determination is clearly demonstrated by research participants
who are language revitalisation actors as they ponder upon what they themselves can do
for and with their heritage language (see excerpts above), as triggered by inner feelings
and needs. A4, who is also friends with A2 and has been writing songs and learning MPC,
was approached about an opportunity to make recordings in conversational MPC to be
posted online for sale though he has not received order at the time of research. He is
hoping to reach out to the younger generation via making music in MPC:
[E6.5, A4]
As I’ve said… I’m… I was thinking to myself… it… it… our language is going
down. Maybe there is a chance for me… through my music… or through this I
can some way or another help our language and our culture maybe to… we
consider it come to a bit of life.
6.3.1.2 Language revitalisation as restoring and reconstructing heritage and
relationships
The second sub-category emerged from seeing language revitalisation as restoring
and reconstructing (i) heritage in relation to peoplehood (i.e. the larger sense of being
MPC-speaking group members) and communities of practice (i.e. the networks one
socialises using MPC) and (ii) relationships (i.e. old and new ties). Research participants
are found to express their longing for times spent hearing about or talking in MPC, often
overlapping with time spent with family and friends. Their pride in speaking MPC is
expressed in their relating speaking MPC to being who they are, as demonstrated by A1
who associates his love and passion for MPC to his growing up and the activities and
stories, in search of restoration and reconstruction of heritage and relationships that made
up those years in the following excerpt:
[E6.6, A1]
I… I… I can strongly say that my influence of the love and passion for the
language and the culture started when I was a growing, ah, teenager…like I said,
the conversation is so unique. So that is actually like I say, uh… the things that
124
keep us… or especially in my case, keep me wanting, you know, to… to… to have
more… We… we’ll usually come together at about 8.30 after dinner and we
sometimes go on till three o’clock in the morning because it’s so exciting
sometimes, so interesting and the conversation can just go on and go on. And then
sometimes we also uh… relate some personal uh… stories about… about how we
were growing up, you know… things were different and the games we used to
play, the experiences still have because before the reclamation, uh… of our sea-
front, there was a lot of games, a lot of activities that were connected to the sea.
So some of the stories like stories of fishermen, like stories of uh… of when we
were kids, we used to play by the sea, we used to catch those small fishes by the
beach and oh a lot of things. So stories can never end. So hopefully in the future
we can record our… our sessions and then we can also maybe slowly record
conversations of uh… the native speakers, that we feel have got a lot to share.
Identity alignment motivates and entails the restoration and reconstruction of
heritage and relationships, as one aligns himself or herself towards a more self-
differentiating heritage language speaker or not, in contrast to other languages. The
following excerpt demonstrates how research participants self-differentiate: “We would
never use the English prayers”. A6 relates to how prayers were always recited in MPC
when they were little, foregrounding it in contrast to the English prayers. For the largely
Roman Catholic community, the link between the language and religion is a strong
common cultural denominator (see Baxter, 2012).
[E6.7, A6]
Actually these prayers in not being translated… it’s mine… it’s brought down by
my grandfather. My grandfather used to say these prayers at home when we had
our family Rosaries. He would use the (Malacca) Portuguese prayer. We would
never use the English prayers (my emphasis).
That MPC as a heritage language is used in hopes of restoring heritage in relation
to peoplehood and communities of practice is demonstrated in the following excerpt, as
A8 expressed his longing to see MPC spoken at home and on the streets in the PS like it
used to be:
[E6.8, A8]
That’s what like I told you earlier, I want the mo… mothers to come in so they
can speak the language at home and then whenever they see me on the road and
say, “Hello, teacher.” They could say… sometimes in (Malacca) Portuguese…
you know… Bong Dia (MPC, Good morning) or Bong Atadi (MPC, Good
afternoon)… (xxx) good evening teacher… you know…
125
6.3.1.3 Language revitalisation as reclaiming ownership
The third sub-category captures the trigger to take control and reclaim the
ownership, not only of heritage language, but also of heritage (e.g. way-of-life, culture,
ceremony and peoplehood), and of the community and place in which the heritage,
peoplehood and livelihood (e.g. fishing as making a living, tourism) interact. Language
revitalisation is political in a way as one group moves towards self-determination and
taking things into their own hands. This is in response to social development and can
bring possible tension to their social positioning and in the social structure. The following
excerpt demonstrates the subordinated social positioning of the group in study, as A1
laments about losing ground as a community although they have a unique culture and
heritage. The place of heritage language in the language-culture nexus (in the sense of
Fishman, 1988) is foregrounded:
[E6.9, A1]
You see now, actually we… we… we are losing so much of ground. We have
stayed together as a community with our language, our culture, with our identity
for the last 500 years, huh. And hopefully like I say, we can live and with this
uh… unique culture of ours for the next 500 years… So, but basically things…
we think it’s more to keep your heritage, it’s the identity, you know, the
language will tell who you are, your identity. So the language is important eh…
the language of our forefathers. Why let it die… of… or disappear if we can, you
know, just have it going on as… as… as long as we are… we… we… our
descendants are, you know, are around.
The positioning of heritage language and its relation to the positioning of one’s
identification and portrayal of self is demonstrated in the following excerpt. A2, perceived
to be a knowledgeable and proficient MPC speaker by other group members, reiterates
the need to speak MPC as part of their cultural identity below. The value of MPC,
distinguished from its linguistic currency in the present socio-economic system by A2, is
linked to the positioning of one’s self: feeling proud identifying with the MPC-speaking
heritage:
126
[E6.10, A2]
See my way of thinking is different. Not to make anything, not to gain anything,
just continue to build what we are. Yeah, ah. The Portuguese descendants and we
are speaking this language, I am always proud that this thing can go on with
others, this younger generation. I always love that. Since what we know, if you
are keeping to yourself, is no value, and if you know something that you can share,
it’s not the value of money that value that but you feel so proud of what you are
as a… ah… descendants of Portuguese as speaking Kristang, you should be very
proud (my emphasis).
Similarly, as one of the oldest and well-respected MPC speakers, A8 talks about
how he realised that he must reclaim his heritage language in the following excerpt. A8
expresses the need to change and to take things into their own hands for matters related
to their culture. As explained in Chapter 2, in Malaysia, where it is mandatory to identify
one’s race from birth according to rigid categories, the MPC-speaking group members
tend to be placed under the category of a broad umbrella term, Others, which negates
one’s right ability to claim an ethnic, cultural and even geographical heritage.
[E6.11, A8]
…when I was kid I used to speak Portuguese (MPC) and then I grow up I speak
Portuguese (MPC), English and then I used to observe our community is being
so lack in… in… dialect; not using their mother’s tongue, they promote more
English and Malays. That was I came to the sense of it ya… I said I must get it
back this thing what we lost (my emphasis). So what I did is I had one fellow by
the name of (made anonymous), so we managed to register ourselves uh… uh…
as a Portuguese culture societies. So we revised back all whatever is been lost, not
in practice. So after the Portuguese culture, after register everything I’ll become,
I became my instructor, you see. For… uh… cultural dance, dialects, songs and
so forth and I managed to do it, I formed a group, (19)67 until now I retired…
Now if you say that you are a Portuguese, “I’m a Portuguese”. Can you speak
Portuguese? You can’t. Eh… What sort of Portuguese you are. That’s why by and
by, the government also but they don’t bother. You don’t keep your culture to
them is nothing, right? So there’s no more kaum (Malay, ‘ethnic group’)
Portuguese. There only will be orang Cina (Malay, ‘Chinese people’), Melayu
(‘Malay’), orang India (Malay, ‘Indian’) dan (Malay, ‘and’) orang Sikh (Malay,
‘the Sikhs’). Now, Sikh is coming up because they are promoting their culture but
actually there’s one identity only as an Indian. OK… The Sikh also they come
from India. So now as a kaum Portuguese, akan datang dihapuskan dengan sebab
tidak mempunyai budaya sendiri (Malay, ‘the Portuguese ethnic group might be
removed based on the reason they do not have their own culture’; my emphasis).
127
It is demonstrated here again that the motivations of research participants can
overlap with one another. The wish to re-claim ownership of their heritage, to restore and
reconstruct their heritage, and reconnect with family, friends or people of their own in
general are expressed strongly by A7 in the following excerpt:
[E6.12, A7]
…so what I wanted to do most is, e... besides the party and the song and the dance,
it’s the people meeting and meeting old friends and say, “Hey, this is ours la...
We forgot, that’s where... where we came from. This is where our roots la” (my
emphasis). And that happened. So I feel... to me, the greatest success of that (500
years celebration) event was people, huh, coming back and giving it’s uh... respect
and... and what... what is due to that. I think in the matter of thirty to fifty years,
the language will be gone. So, that was my greatest fear. So, I thought we had to
do something about it or else we lose something that is a gem to our... our heritage.
Because that is something that is worth, there’s no price tag attached to it. That
gives us part of our... our identity.
Multiple alignment among group members is demonstrated in the following
excerpt. A5 talks about the need to reclaim MPC as part of their heritage and identity,
while they identify with English-speaking and its associations:
[E6.13, A5]
So that generations to come will say, “Yes, we speak English but we also have a
heritage language and that is descended from the time the Portuguese were here”.
Developed and evolved throughout the periods of the Dutch and the... uh...
English. And even now, it’s further developing. But will it go on if it’s not written?
Will it go on when this is the age of technology where everything can be, you
know, kept in files... and... and, you know, disc whatever it is. If it’s not done
now, when is it going to be done? They have a language and they know at least a
smattering of phrases and words, they can call it their language… But I’m saying
the... the only fine factor is, if you have the same culture, you are a Christian, now
you ah... you have a choice to have another thing added to your culture and that is
your language. If you want it, fair enough; if you don’t want it, that’s your
problem. This is another little jewel that you can add to your culture. You know
how to celebrate Christmas, good. You know how to celebrate all the festivals that
the Eurasians celebrate but, you know, the people of the Portuguese settlement
have a language. Do you want to know their language? If you want to know, fine.
You’re... tha... it is available.
6.3.1.4 Language revitalisation as work opportunities
The fourth sub-category of motivations sees the potential of language
revitalisation in giving MPC a role in livelihood and, by extension, the present socio-
128
economic systems. All language revitalisation efforts involve a certain level of work. This
section deals particularly with research participants who have chanced upon or have had
to take up language revitalisation as work or post-retirement work opportunities, either as
an individual choice or because of certain affiliation with association. Although language
revitalisation fell to certain research participants and became part of their work, these
works remain generally voluntary in nature and most of them in the PS do not gain
monetary profits. The voluntary nature is exemplified mostly by the Group A research
participants. For instance, A9, who holds a post in a local association, started her
involvement in language classes in 2012 as it “fell” to her since other committee members
were held up by other commitments. The local association that A6, A7 and A9 are
involved in invited A8 to teach MPC in 2012 and paid a minimal wage to A8 as a token
of appreciation.
The potential of using outcome of language revitalisation as work opportunities is
also showing slightly in the following excerpts. Although A4 did not charge potential
buyers of his recordings at the time of research, A4, who was making recordings for
conversational MPC, started doing so as he chanced upon interest towards buying MPC
recordings from outside the PS.
[E6.14, A4]
Can say it maybe it’s ah… thing I’m making money out of it. Ya… it’s not…
basically it’s because a lot of… of my nephew’s friends is asking him they want
to learn… So they keep telling him… “You get some materials I don’t mind
paying you”. So I’ve compiled about a hundred over. It’s in here. So… He says
he wants to… I tell him “Ok if you can make money, you make money. It’s up to
you”.
Coming from outside PS, A5 recalls how she started language revitalisation work
after retiring as she got in touch with a foundation for a possibility of getting funded on
her book writing to pave her way towards her post-retirement planning. A5’s case will
also have to be considered for community-external factors which are discussed in Section
6.3.2.3.
129
[E6.15, A5]
Yeah, I first got very passionate about uh… writing the language immediately
after I retired, opted… opted out a teaching profession and that was like in 1989.
And from there on I did my research in the PS. I gathered a few bits and pieces of
conversation as well as uh…. vocabulary in the settlement. And I wrote to the
foundation to help me uh… develop a book which I was going to write. I knew
the trustee of the foundation because he visited Malacca.
6.3.2 Using Available and Creating Resources
Methods employed in bottom-up language revitalisation efforts are informed or
influenced by personal experience and training. Their methods can be categorised into
three forms: regenerating interest in endangered heritage language, making use of
available resources and creating resources, and community-external factors. Most of these
actors are fulfilling their personal interest while engaged in language revitalisation
through the three forms as they are also learning and reconnecting with their heritage
language at the same time.
6.3.2.1 (Re)generating interest in MPC
Research participants relate to the joy and fun in speaking and learning MPC
which keep them committed to their work while spreading this joy and fun of speaking
and learning MPC to others. The MPC speaking group who meet at least once a week
with five or more people in each session could not have demonstrated this point enough.
The group started out as “random, spontaneous and habitual chatting” at funerals. They
took the chance to converse with others who they could practise MPC with and learn
MPC as among the attendees at the funerals would be some MPC speakers who are
regarded as more proficient speakers including the elders and fishermen by the group
members. The group members decided to meet weekly if not more to continue their
pursuit of speaking in MPC and learning from each other through their sessions. A1
elaborates about their usual activities in a session in the following excerpt:
130
[E6.16, A1]
So uh… if we are not very sure of uh… the meaning of a word or how to apply it,
what we’ll do is, we’ll take note and this friend of ours, he will do further reference
or further research. He’ll maybe go to the Internet and try and get the Portuguese
equivalent of the word or maybe uh… the meaning of the word tha…that is closest
or that maybe connected and then at the same time we also sometimes uhm… take
note of the different ways the word can be applied and we take note, whatever we
do we always write. A note about the words, or the phrases, or even the stories.
So uh… each of us take our own notes and then we… we study the notes when
we go back and maybe if there is further questions, we ask in our next
conversation. And at the same time we also uhm… listen to other people speak,
especially native speakers, and we will note the words that uh… are seldom used.
We will also maybe note the words that are… not correctly used, like Bahasa
Malaysia words or English words, and we will take note of all those words and
we’ll bring it up at our session. And see what is the proper word or uh… whether
it’s been applied correctly.
The generating of interest in MPC plays an important role. However, as will be
shown later, the generating of interest in MPC will have to match the interest in language
revitalisation efforts, as discussed in the outcome of efforts (section 6.3.4), seeing reasons
that have been laid out for the response to the language classes revolve around comments
on whether the classes were interesting or fun.
6.3.2.2 Making use of available resources and creating resources
MPC language classes, conducted by A8 in 2010-2011 and resumed by A6 in
2013, were targeted at children and youngsters though A5 welcomed anyone interested
to attend the classes. No fees were charged for attendees. Classes started in 2010 but were
put on hold after experiencing a decrease in attendees and losing the original classroom.
Both language classes started in 2010 and resumed in 2013, similar to other beginner’s
language classes, started from greetings and eventually added more into the syllabus.
From 2010 to 2011, A8 conducted the language classes while A6 assisted in teaching and
other aspects of the language classes. The language classes were thought to be a part of
the academy of culture and arts under the local organisation, according to A7. A8 talks
about what he taught in classes in the following excerpt, and as can be gathered from what
131
he says, at the grassroots level, the materials are self-determined and developed similar
to other minority communities:
[E6.17, A8]
Just to make them to know how to say good morning… what’s the meaning of
good morning, what’s the meaning of good afternoon, evening huh… and how to
address an elderly person… this… all sort of things la. I go like that… you see…
I go important is to respect. After that only, will come to the other words… OK
how to… say a (xxx), how to say plate, how to say saucer, how to say drain… all
that… lesson got. I went until that circumstances but suddenly I cannot go more
than that because there’s no attendance, you see… I have to do my homework…
you see… Now OK… this… this… like Friday I give… what sort of class, what
kind of words I use. So the next one, I’ll make them to repeat… the next time. So
I see oh… they can… they write down everything… OK. Then the other time the
class, I change different paragraph… so this all my work… you see…
A6 took a similar approach when resuming language class in 2013. She inherited
materials from her late father, and assisted in previous language classes. She also draws
from her training in teaching. In the following excerpt, A6 explains how she started
teaching MPC and the approach she uses:
[E6.18, A6]
OK… Where I started uh… actually is from my dad. When… before he passed
away in that 20… uh… 29… 2009… 2008… sorry he passed away, he already
prepared all these documents, all the syllabus for classes. He’s supposed to start
in Dec… January 20… 2009. He already had a group of teenagers that he want
to teach and they were quite keen to learn. But unfortunately he passed away in
December. So I said, ‘these documents are all here, they not going to sleep with
him. So I am going to do something about it.” So I’m doing it now… My way I
doing it like how I have studied in the pre-school. So I go to that level but no
ABCs. So I may start with “Good Morning”, the greetings and all that… ya… that
way and make the children speak to each other… Because I”m going to use a
hundred percent solely on my father’s books. Because we had some teachers who
came in, who tried to help but they don’t speak the language and then they helped
us half way and then just left like this. So I say, like this, I might as well do it on
my own. I can do it…
To teach MPC in a classroom setting and compile written materials involve
writing. MPC has always been an oral language. There is currently no consensus on the
spelling convention for MPC. The views on the spelling conventions for MPC will be
revisited in Chapter 7. In general, the views expressed show a tendency towards a spelling
132
convention that reflects a phonemic spelling system but reflect the complexities involved
in deciding such conventions.
6.3.2.3 The community-external factor
Publications and reference materials in MPC, targeted at Eurasians and anyone
who might have an interest in the language have been written by A5. To protect the
identity of research participants, there will be no direct links provided to the works. In the
following excerpt, A5 talks about how she learnt and wrote books on MPC. The
community-external factor adds to the motivation to continue language revitalisation
efforts when works are received well outside the Portuguese Settlement and recognised
in academic platforms such as conferences. Although other research participants do refer
to Eurasians outside Malacca, only A5 includes the diaspora Eurasian community as one
of the target audiences:
[E6.19, A5]
I just went uh... to the Portuguese settlement, I knew I could conver... I... I could
only count from one to ten. So I sat in the coffee shop there and I said, “Eh, what
is ele... eleven and what is twelve and I went on. Numer... for the... for the
numbers. And then I heard them speak and I jotted little things down and, you
know, started a conversation with them… When I first wrote the first book there
was no target. I’ll just write it for the community. Just for the community and I
thought there were tons of Eurasians in Malacca, Singapore, and Malaysia and in
Perth. So the target group were all Eurasian. The second one was... the target
group were school children. Secondary school children. The third one was for the
whole community that means children, adults, and anybody and everybody who
wanted to know about the Kristang language. That’s why I used it in (xxx) in
Malay like Bahasa (xxx). And all my books are only in English and in Kristang,
not in Bahasa at all.
Apart from receiving recognition, funding is clearly crucial to sustaining language
revitalisation and A5 has, from the beginning of her work, applied for funding and she
feels encouraged to go on with her work and “will not stop” as she is hoping to eventually
reach out to undergraduates in universities as she believes that they are the ones who will
133
transmit MPC to the next generation. A few local college or university names were
mentioned in her considerations.
Apart from A5, A8 has also gone overseas to talk about his heritage language,
heritage and people in the company of interested parties including academicians, as
recalled in the following excerpt. The realisation that the world out there is interested in
their heritage and development has invoked positive feelings towards his efforts and
added value and recognitions for his heritage language:
[E6.20, A8]
I think I was there (in Portugal) around… I went there 195… 2009 la… and think
so… month of October. I was there. I stayed there for eighteen days. So I was
attending conference for seven (xxx) every morning, just like you interview me.
Huh… They want to know how we speak… and how… huh… we go… go along
and how are still the people managed to keep the dialect. So I used to tell them
what is happening to Malacca but I said of course the heritage we are still keeping
on the dialect (MPC) still there…
The community-external factor is also found in the references and materials
research participants refer to. These include the European Portuguese dictionaries and
materials the language speaking group refers to and European Portuguese spelling
conventions referred to by research participants. A7, according to his research, claims to
have found possible links between MPC and Galician and quotes what people have
commented on the uniqueness of MPC, compared to other Portuguese-based varieties:
[E6.21, A7]
So, even… even if you ask a Galician, they will tell you that they feel more
Portuguese than they feel themselves as Spanish. Ah... that they… how they feel
la... and uh… Brazilian, I wouldn’t say they feel Portuguese; they feel Brazilian.
[Yes] but they know their language is Portuguese. [Yes] Ah... that… that… The
same goes with the Cape Verde and all those sub pictures la... but, according to a
lot of people, they say ah... even Father Chera, he said he went to all these
Portuguese places but the one he felt the most affinity and felt the most welcomed
are the Malacca Portuguese la... [Mmm...] They said, “Malacca Portuguese are
not like Macau or Goa, they’re the people lovers. They’re the people who feel so
much for us. We are so welcomed here.” So, they felt the most here, their
sentiments. That’s what I read.
134
6.3.3 Mobilising Support
In relation to methods, actors are found to have turned to familiar or selective
networks to mobilise support in the form of recognition of efforts such as others’ positive
comments towards efforts or being recognised as representing the MPC-speaking
community, followers or members, or support towards efforts and outcome of efforts such
as recognising or purchasing MPC materials. The three sub-processes of mobilising
support are reaching out to listening networks, understanding audience and revaluing
endangered heritage language.
6.3.3.1 Reaching out to listening network(s)
Although research participants may not have an exact idea of who their target
audience would be, they naturally reach out to people from their familiar or selective
networks. It will become clearer by the end of this chapter and in the next chapter that
decision-making in language revitalisation matters could not be isolated from the
underlying accumulating and interacting ideologies from the past and present. For
instance, A5 has become associated with MPC outside the PS as her work is recognised
by MPC heritage speakers outside the PS. Past events were recalled including being
complained for holding an illegal assembly in the PS when she wanted to conduct MPC
classes and it appears that response towards her works outside the PS has been
encouraging, in contrast to the response from the PS. As her books were funded, she has
not felt pressured over the sales of her books as “it’s all paid for already” and “as far as
Singapore and Perth and other parts of Australia, they’ve taken my books and they’ve
managed to, you know, distribute them and sell them”.
Which network one reaches out to stems from one’s identification and portrayal
of self, whether one wants to align with the MPC-speaking heritage. A5 expresses her
135
opinions about who MPC belongs to by relating to the dynamics of the Eurasian heritage
in the following excerpt:
[E6.22, A5]
In this case, I don’t think anybody who can say that, “It only belongs to people
who have Portuguese surnames”. It should belong to all Eurasians who have a
colonial past and an Asian past in them (my emphasis). That means they can be
descended from the English or German or, you know, if they have one parent who
has been or grandparent who has been a... from a... Europe and one from Asia,
it’s fine. And even now it’s so watered down that they say, “Oh, yeah, my
grandmother used to say, you know, this and that. Or my great-grandmother was
in Malacca and she came from Malacca but now she’s in... in Kuala Lumpur or
she’s in Ipoh now. And we don’t know... we don’t know anything.” Now, if you
don’t know anything about your language, that means you are excluding your
community. I feel so. You do not want to belong.
The MPC language group also exemplifies the natural tendency of reaching out
to familiar or selective networks. However, the group membership seems to be rather
exclusive as expressed in the following excerpt since the group started out as casual
sessions among like-minded friends:
[E6.23, A1]
We are open to anybody who wants to come but obviously that person has to
involve one of the members that he wants to come, no problem. And uh… like I
say, whether we want to expand the group to a… a… a bigger group or to a…
other places, at the moment, no. At work, we are quite comfortable with where we
are, but we hope to s… to… to at least uhm… start this enthusiasm with other
groups. Maybe like our, like I was telling you, my sister from Australia also called
me and said, you know… “We are having our own session here.” Because they
heard of our session. So that’s what we… we hope to do. And like I say, hopefully,
you know, others can start their own splinter groups. And make it like
something… like what we have, a weekly get together of friends. And say, “OK,
today is a s… speak Kristang session, anybody uh… who speak other than
Kristang uh… you will be forfeited”.
6.3.3.2 Understanding audience and spreading fun
At a more formal level of learning MPC, language classes are open to children of
the Portuguese Settlement community members who wish to learn MPC. A6, with a
background in teaching pre-school children, shared how she keeps her students interested
in attending her language classes by integrating fun and outings as part of the lesson in
the following excerpt:
136
[E6.24, A6]
Uhm… Most of the kids they know me. So how I… I have to, like, give them
reinforcements. You know… when they come for class after six months I took
them for boat ride… you know… bring them out. This what the children here they
want. Not just come for class. But they want something behind that… So that’s
what I did, I bring them out. I… as I took them down the river cruise, I explained
to them in Malacca Portuguese what you see now… OK… where we are going,
this and all that. Hmm… So that’s part of the lesson. That’s how it goes.
Prior to starting language classes in 2011-2012, the local association was reported
to have surveyed around casually, as recalled by A9. It was decided that the classes should
start from basic MPC. However, the interest towards language classes was found to differ
from one age group to the other. This goes on to emphasise the importance of considering
the group members’ needs, way-of-life and close-to-heart matters when planning
language revitalisation efforts.
[E6.25, A9]
But unfortunately sometimes the youth they have their own mind set. To them that
they see children coming for classes, (they think) “Oh this is children’s class”. So
we… you know… they don’t want and they have their own things to do.
6.3.3.3 Revaluing MPC
Based on his exposure and research, A7 puts forward a need to be cautious of how
other people, including researchers, to have assumed some position that might have
placed MPC farther away from European Portuguese.
[E6.26, A7]
I don’t feel that way. I just feel that it should be proper and uh… even though you
want to call it the creole or whatever, it should not be made intentionally uh… far
in moved from its Portuguese uh… origins. Because I feel that, maybe it’s not
done intentionally, but uh… maybe it was part of… of an assuming position that
uh… people sometimes also like to make it as much of a creole… I use the word
creole, ah... [Mmm...] uh… as much of um… what do you call it um… as further
removed from the original language as possible. Ah... so to make it… but that is
taking the head and then… but we… we feel different. From our hearts we feel
we are Portuguese, you see? And we cannot be removed from that. Even though
we can speak a corrupted form or whatever it is, but still we are speaking
Portuguese. Ah… that’s the thing.
137
More will be discussed in relation to what research participants are doing with
their heritage language in the next chapter. In Chapter 7, the discussion over a range of
language-related issues will demonstrate how research participants are revaluing their
heritage language and heritage when doing what they are doing.
6.3.4 Outcome of Efforts
Outcome of language revitalisation efforts profile the MPC-speaking group’s
perceptions and reception towards bottom-up MPC language revitalisation efforts.
Compared to the language-revitalisation-actors or Group A research participants, non-
language-revitalisation actors or Group B research participants are less eloquent on the
topics related to their endangered heritage language, except for a few from the older
generation and a few from the younger generation. Such a difference in eloquence is
depicted in the continuum of managing endangered language relevance: self-assimilating
on one end and self-differentiating on the other, as the Group A research participants have
gone through different stages of exposure to, reflections, and discussions (whether within
self or with others) on possible language revitalisation efforts. They have also taken the
initiative to learn more about their heritage language, including looking into possible
source languages and reading up on academic work on MPC.
6.3.4.1 Perceiving MPC language revitalisation efforts
Generally, research participants expressed that they welcomed language
revitalisation efforts and recognised the positive effects and influences that will be
brought upon by language revitalisation efforts. However, views towards language
revitalisation suggest a sense of reservation among some towards participating in it and a
mismatch between positive perceptions of language revitalisation and actual participation
though in general, research participants welcome language revitalisation efforts.
138
Although language revitalisation efforts are welcomed, the following excerpt shows the
view of B24 who perceived that researchers working on MPC or culture-related works in
the PS have done so for their own personal pursuits. By now, we know that how a
researcher positions himself or herself can impact on how his or her work is perceived
and received, based on more works on minority language groups and how researchers
approach them (e.g. Bowern & Warner, 2015; Cripen & Robinson, 2013). The present
and future research and fieldworks in the PS will have to consider how one positions
himself or herself as a researcher. By extension, the future language revitalisation efforts
actors, be it coming from the PS or outside PS, will also have to consider how they
position themselves in relation to other MPC-speaking group members.
[E6.27, B24]
They come here to get the (PhD or Master) no problem la… But there has never
been a solid thing to say that oh they are…they… they do this documentation and
this is what is supposed to be known. They have not given their grounds. They
did... most of them they come to do their research it’s for their own this one la…
So far we also have not put research for more words or the language. We have not
la… Ah… So I thing so that one is very difficult… Even with help, somebody
will be against it and you know… So what we can do for ourselves, we do, those
we want help, we help…
How MPC language revitalisation efforts are perceived and received by group
members and other language revitalisation actors allow the heterogeneous voices of group
members who commonly identify with a MPC-speaking heritage to be uncovered, as well
as how group members perceive each other. The following excerpt demonstrates the
different views and positioning in language revitalisation efforts, and by extension, in
how group members align with a self identifying with the MPC-speaking heritage in
practice and how they position themselves in the social structure and community
structure:
[E6.28, A7]
Lethargic, lethargic. And because they don’t see nobody likes to hear bad new
la... If I tell you, you know, this language if not careful can die off, you know...
139
they don’t hear that, uh. They’ll… they’ll shut off. Not… not normally there, you
know, but some will be receptive, you know bought Toto (a local betting
operation) din… don’t know whether I struck or not, that’s more important than
(xxx), you know... (xxx) la... you know... but as a momentum… momentum
(xxx)… that’s why I say, it cannot be done in a very imposing manner la... you
know... uh... but I also heard there are certain groups are doing uh... certain kind
of uh... activities like uh... one of the holidays here, (name made anonymous) is
having a... a conversational Portuguese, they’re sitting down and they’re talking
in Portuguese like... but they... they make it such a... an exclusive thing, they put
their directory uh... what uh... “Attendance is by invitation”. Ah... So that’s what
I don’t like about it, you see... so, for them means OK, “We have that so we will
keep to our group”. So they are trying to form a class system. It’s bad, you know...
In our case, we are open to all, see... you cannot have that kind of uh... closed
mentality. Where got sometimes uh... these Eurasians ah have got their this...
this... this... this... this... this uh... call it uh... inclination towards being elite there,
you know... I always tell our... our Eurasians whenever... when we go to Singapore
also I tell them, “Your elitist... elitist learnings must go la”. You know... we have
to cater for the masses, huh... and I... many... many... many of them don’t like it
when I say that.
The next chapter will discuss how group members make sense and meanings of
language revitalisation efforts, both (i) the salient and general meanings (Section 7.2) and
(ii) the different meaning-makings (Section 7.3). Overall, there is a general positive
perception towards language- and culture-related efforts, as demonstrated in the
following excerpt, as B8 points out that there is a comeback of MPC following language
classes and new interest in it: “most of the people are speaking MPC nowadays”.
[E6.29, B8, R]
R: How would you describe the community’s attitude towards the language?
B8: I see everything is doing good la… down here. The… how to say ah…
R: Do you think they feel proud to be speaking the language?
B8: Definitely la… because mostly we… we go around, most… most of the
people are speaking Portuguese nowadays ah…
R: But uh… perhaps the teenagers are not speaking the language…
B8: Ya. On… because now they have to have a class or maybe event according to
this Kristang la… So let the… let the interest come, then the people will join ah…
They have to make groups, maybe learn about this poem ah… about the talk…
Just simple, simple words, that’s how they will learn, then they will come back…
R: When there’s a language class, how do the uh… community people respond to
this language class?
140
B8: They are all Ok la... Like we, that day we did the dinner; about hundred tables
and a lot of people par... participate la... They have dance, they have poems, they
have singing, they have talking and how the marriage of the Kristang all la...
That’s how you learn la... But of course a lot of people la... And this people here,
if you say about Kristang, I think most of them will come out and hear ah... So
better if... like you say once in a week you have event, event about Kristang... ah...
or we have like poems, we have competitions, maybe I see a lot of people la...
Ah... Because our own community is keeping quiet maybe, they just don’t wanna
ah... So we cannot blame anyone la...
6.3.4.2 Reception of MPC language revitalisation efforts and materials
As observed prior to starting research, both projects involved and this thesis, there
appeared to be a lack of awareness if not response towards the bottom-up MPC language
revitalisation efforts. The findings of further research confirm the perceived gap between
the efforts and awareness of or response towards the efforts. Most non-language-
revitalisation-actors reported that they were not aware of or knew little about the language
revitalisation efforts when answering follow-up questions to structured questions posed
such as the following excerpts. Only a handful had come across MPC materials published
as revitalisation efforts. Most of them have, however, seen MPC written down in booklets
made for cultural activities or as used on social media.
[E6.30, B6]
R: Do you think having books in Kristang would help people to learn the
language?
B6: Ya. But uh… we don’t get… we don’t have that.
[E6.31, B10]
R: Uhm… what do you hope people can do to help the community continue…
[Maybe…] speaking Kristang?
B10: …they can try their very best to say like, talk to our leader, our kampong
(Malay, “village”), right, Portuguese, this uh… Regedor. To try to put one or two
teachers to teach our… our children, especially. Uh… some Kristang so that our
Kristang won’t die off.
R: OK. Um… There have been some books and dictionaries published in
Kristang. Have you ever come across any books or dictionary?
141
B10: So far, I never see, honestly, yeah, I never see.
R: OK. But if you get to get hold of these books…?
B10: Yeah, I would like to… [You would like to…] mmm…
R: Ho… how would you feel if you get to read um…
B10: A book of Portuguese?... [Yeah, in Kristang] Um… I think it will be nice

la… if I can read, but I guess, I don’t know, I don’t think I can read because I
don’t understand reading Portuguese at all.
R: OK. Do you know of any friends or families who have books in Kristang?
B10: Maybe A7… A7 might have, ah... because they’re leaders, right, ah… maybe
they will have.
[E6.32, B9]
R: So… You… haven’t got any friends or family members who are using any
Kristang books or…
B9: No.
R: Kristang dictionary?
B9: No.
R: Ok. Uh... But you are aware that there are these books or ah... you are not...
aware of... of the existence of these books?
B9: Mmm... Not aware ah... They have books ah…?
As most people in the PS are not aware of publications and materials in MPC, it
would be an important step for legitimatising MPC as will be discussed in Chapter 7. In
the following excerpt, B20 expresses that everyone in the PS wants a book written in
MPC.
[E6.33, B20]
R: Um… There… as we mentioned, there have been some materials such as…
such as dictionaries and books published in Kristang... [Mhm…] How do you feel
about seeing Kristang written down?
B20: Wah, I think I’ll… I’ll be the most happiest guy on earth, I guess. Yeah, that
is… that is what we want also la… to be honest with you. That is what everyone
in the settlement wants like getting a book which is written in Kristang. Yeah, that
is what everybody wants. Everybody in the settlement wants that.
142
R: Just now we talked about the language classes and language documentations
and documentations of the Kristang culture, how do you think the people here are
reacting towards these uh… efforts and documentations?
B20: Um… so, so la… [So, so…] yeah.
R: Do you think they support it, do you think they agree with the efforts and
documentations?
B20: Well I mean, some of them will, some of them won’t agree with it, some of
them will agree with it.
R: Mhm… Do you think they feel nice that all these are being done?
B20: Yeah, yeah. They will definitely… they will definitely feel nice... [Mmm…]
cause it’s… they… it’s different la… I would say.
R: On your part, are you doing anything to help keep the language alive?
B20: Um… Not really, I would say. But I just… I just uh… what I do is like if
one of my friend who ask… ask me about um… no, ask me a word, what’s…
what is this… what is this in Kristang? What is this Kristang? I’ll… I’ll proudly
let them… I’ll proudly and find out just to let them know. If I don’t… if I don’t
know those words, I’ll proudly go and find out and let them know. But if I know,
I’ll directly just tell them, (xxx), yup. That is what I do la... And at first, of course,
making fun, that’s the main thing la... We Kristang, if you don’t know something,
we have to make fun of you… we’ll have to make fun first then… and then we’ll
start giving you.
Only four out of 33 non-language-revitalisation-actors have participated in the
bottom-up efforts; one having attended language classes conducted in 2011-2012 while
the other three having attended language classes conducted in 2013. At the time of
research, the age range of these four research participants were 10-19. The three research
participants who attended the 2013 classes happened to stay on the same street. Two of
them are siblings while the other research participant is their neighbour. B27, who
attended language classes in 2011-2012, shared why she had stopped attending the
classes. Reasons that have been laid out for the response to the language classes revolve
around comments on whether the classes were interesting or fun.
[E6.34, B27]
R: Did you enjoy the classes?
143
B27: Ya.
R: You like the classes?
B27: Fun.
R: Fun. But why did you stop?
B27: Because I don’t know how to layan (Malay, “entertain”) I don’t know how
to entertain other… that type of people.
R: Uh… you mean the other children… [Hmm…] or… [Ya] or the instructor?
B27: The children.
R: The children. Why?
B27: Hmm… not close to them.
R: Not close to them. So…
B27: But we talk la… I just… just not close to them. I can’t… not comfortable.
However, A7 is optimistic with a possible better response towards bottom-up
MPC language revitalisation efforts.
[E6.35, A7]
Uh... actually, of anticipation, I expected that kind of amount. Uh... but uh...
people are just uh... not uh... call it uh... because people... everybody loves a
winner, right? And then people maybe are looking... wait and see kind of thing
first. So, some will be waiting for it to fail; some will be waiting and say how it
happens. So, if it catches momentum, and there’s some degree of... of... of...
success, that will encourage more to come. So now I... they’re just watching and
they... it’s not that they’re not watching; they’re watching, you know? But I think
if things catches up, they will come also. Ah, so we have to start from there. Ah,
they will. So, we are waiting for the momentum to start. When it starts going, and
then I’m telling you, others will also start to do their own thing.
A few group members have participated in language revitalisation activities but
those have been mostly activities organised or carried out by non-PS-MPC-speaking-
group-members usually conducted by foreign or local teams or researchers and for the
production of cultural and language-related documentaries, both have had representatives
from foreign and local teams. These will be revisited in Chapter 7. The following excerpts
demonstrate how different research participants perceive what they were learning in the
144
classes organised by the Portuguese foundation, Korsang. Experiences with the language
classes conducted by foreigners have come to be retold slightly differently according to
the time and conductors. B9 talks about his experience in language classes conducted by
Portuguese.
[E6.36, B9]
B9: Uh... Actually I... I learned about our language itself... I mean like how to
converse properly ah…
R: Properly?
B9: Ya… How to… I mean like how do we combine those words and all
together... There’s a lot of things...
R: You… you do that… you did that in the class?
B9: Yah... Quite... (xxx)
R: Uh... When the… when that lady spoke to you... could you understand what
she was talking about?
B9: At that time I mean she… she spoke in Kristang so certain thing I can I know,
certain… both of the things I didn’t know that time la… Yeah.
R: So she wasn’t speaking in European Portuguese?
B9: No, not European Portuguese. It’s our Portuguese.
R: OK. Was the class conducted…
B9: Conducted at the school, yeah...
R: At the school?
B9: At the school yeah
R: In this school?
B9: In this school, yeah
R: Oh, Ok. Were… were there many students?
B9: I mean uh… quite a number of us la… I think 20 or 20 students who are
there… Yeah… all… all also of us our friends are there.
145
In the excerpt above, B9 thinks he was learning MPC while in the following
excerpt, B22 recalls learning European Portuguese in the classes organised by the same
Portuguese foundation:
[E6.37, B22]
R: So and you have also uh... attended language classes, the Kristang language
classes...
B22: Before, when I was young.
R: Was it conducted by a Portuguese?
B22: Ya... Portuguese from Portugal.
R: Uh... um... Did you learn the European Portuguese or the local Portuguese?
B22: European Portuguese.
R: European Portuguese... OK. How long were the classes?
B22: The classes um... every weekends uh... two hours... Mmm.. But it only last
for one year.
R: Only for one year. So you attended the classes for a year?
B22: Yes.
6.3.5 Continuing with MPC as Heritage and Identity
Both Group A and Group B research participants were invited to share how they
would like to propose for further language revitalisation efforts if they had unlimited
resources. Many Group B research participants, when asked to propose activities for
language revitalisation, language classes are the most often cited choice and are hoped to
be made livelier by including more cultural aspects or skills training; other cited choices
are funds and community centre. Group A research participants, on the other hand, have
more specific aspirations or plans in mind. Their cited choices are creating materials and
resources that represent the variety and dynamic of their heritage language such as prayers
and publications in MPC and continuing or expanding language classes. Prayers in MPC
were eventually released in the form of CD in early 2015. The following sections close
146
in on the salient patterns that emerge from their discourses on proposing language
revitalisation efforts.
6.3.5.1 Looking for communities of practice
Group members’ motivations of speaking, learning or revitalising MPC include
restoring and reconstructing heritage and relationships. This continued to surface when
group members were asked to propose language revitalisation efforts as their
recommendations include gathering like-minded people. The following excerpts are two
such recommendations:
[E6.38, B30]
This is how we must do, you know… As I said, you cannot call them to come
here; you have to go and see them. First and foremost, you have to make a step by
talking like I said, No… if I had the funding, I will get the young people – those
who are twenty or thirty years old, you know… must be able to speak and
communicate to this generations of people. By how? By talking to them, “How
are you Uncle?” “Good evening” “Good morning”, ke… everything. Just talk
about natural things, it’s about you and… and this one; I’m not talking about the
neighbours. I came here to talk to you. So you have to build that relationship, you
know… that he should be able to share… he will share it with you because he
knows you are here not to uh… you must build that confidence, you must give it.
So we must teach these people who are going to meet these people, how to talk to
them. How you should be able to sit down and listen to them, even for five
minutes, never mind. You have to start in that moment first. Slowly, you create…
when you’re coming, and then they will call you. (xxx). Instead of five minutes
you are talking to him or talking to this family, ten minutes. As time goes by, you
will be sitting down talking one hour with them. In our language.
[E6.39, B20]
B20: I will definitely do it, because we already have like Portuguese classes and…
while… I mean Portuguese I was a bit… I would say a bit, not really that a bit,
but just difference… [Ya] between Kristang and Portuguese… [Yes] Yeah, so
um… we… we have uh… Portuguese classes for the children, I’ll definitely try
my best to make Kristang classes. I mean to have Kristang classes for children.
And also um… do it like… like a tuition thing where, you know… where you
have exams and… I’ll also have like… like a Kristang club where… where you
have all these… all these children playing um… indoor games, outdoor games,
and just to make them speak Kristang. I feel that’s the best way to improve their
Kristang because that is the place where everybody, I mean all the children, will
be on one spot at one time. So… and they just get few… few mentors and leaders
being inside there just speaking Kristang everytime attend to children who
definitely know how to speak Kristang. That is what I think I’ll do la...
147
R: What do you hope to achieve with the… the… the… the Portuguese club and
the classes?
B20: No, it’s just that um… instead of just being in a room, Facebook, speaking
English, and telling people… proudly telling people that you’re Kristang or you’re
Portuguese and you don’t even know how to speak. Why… why… why not I just
have a club and let all the children… all the children be inside there and s… learn
how to speak Kristang. And I can.. I… I mean, I definitely… if we do like a
concert thing and have a play thing on stage with all the children, the parents will
have tears of joy... I mean, they’ll have tears of joy in their eyes and thinking that,
“What a wonderful children I have.” They’re like so young and they can speak
Kristang.
R: So if it’s… if it’s up to you, do you think you will target the children in your…
[Settlement…] in… in the propo… [The club thing, is it?] the club thing. Would
you target the children or teenagers or t… young adults or…
B20: I’ll probably say like I… I target the youth… [The youth.] Yes. It’s like
probably um… the section like, thirteen till thirty… I mean, thirteen till thirty then
uh… six till thirteen or something, yeah. And like everybody be at that one place
(xxx), having fun, even though… even though they want run around and…
whatever, want to have fun. But just have a few mentors there standing, speaking
Kristang, they’ll definitely learn how to speak Kristang quickly.
B8 is of the opinion of reaching out to interested people only since calling people
to come forward may be hard. She hopes to see her group on par with other groups in
terms of having cultural trademarks. She makes a point on commitment: though there
may be interest in language classes, commitment towards language classes is feared to be
less compared to participating in events which are short term.
[E6.40, B8]
R: If it’s up to you and you had unlimited resource and you had like support from
the community and you had fund uh... funding, uh... would you like to do
something to help keep the language alive?
B8: Ya. Like I said just now we have some event, maybe every Friday like before
we have... we have events. Like Friday, Saturday, Sunday we have the Portuguese
cultural dance. That’s how tourist come in and they learn our language. Then we
will talk. That’s how we will talk. Like now, they don’t have anything; only expect
the classes. And some children they don’t interest. Because they think they have
to go to school, then go tuition, then come back. Maybe Saturday they have rest,
but instead have to go for Kristang class. So maybe I think like event, more better
event la... ah... They can contrib... can... can (xxx) more better event, so that the
things will have more interest la...
R: So you are thinking of proposing some interesting... events... to attract the

people... to come and learn about the language and culture...
148
B8: So like the own people also have the interest... they don’t think that language
already die...
R: Do... Would you try to attract the young people or anyone who’s interesting in
learning the language and culture?
B8: Better to teach the ones who’s interested than you want to call them to get the
interest because not easy la...
R: So uh... you... you won’t target like a special group of... age group, you won’t
target only just the young people or just the children?
B8: Maybe from the... how you... how you do the event, that’s how the... the
people will learn la... That’s how the people will get or maybe when you do a
exciting event; that’s how volunteers; you don’t care what age; maybe he old age
also when they don’t understand they will learn. They have the interest to join...
R: So uh... is it... what do you hope to achieve with the events?
B8: What I hope to achieve?
R: Ya. If you could decide uh... on what to do, if you had the support and money,
what do you hope to achieve with the... the events that you just proposed?
B8: Maybe can have more events outside. Like they have shows, maybe
sometimes they have show like Indian shows, Malay, all the cultural, so we can
put Portuguese also because like now they only main... maintain these three –
Chinese, Indian and Malay. So maybe we can put Portuguese together... Ah...
R: Who do you think should play a role in getting more people involved in
language efforts?
B8: I think the community have to la... because as a community, they have to a...
a group... to make sure that our village is still alive and never let the people down
la...
6.3.5.2 Learning MPC from fluent MPC speakers
Even though fluency of speakers may be a matter of perception, impression or
even political, most research participants agree that the older generation and fishermen
are among the fluent MPC speakers they can learn from.
[E6.41, B20]
R: Who do you think should play a role in getting more people involved in the
language efforts?
149
B20: Uh… Yeah, all the grandparents
R: What about the parents?
B20: Uh… Parents all… the parents will be more… will have work and blah, blah,
blah… so it’s better to bring their grandparents and…
R: What do you hope that this grandparents can do?
B30: Um… Because grand… grandparents, all the grandparents in the settlement,
they speak Kristang like most of the time. Even though you’re two years old, three
years old, like they’ll just speak Kristang like most of the time. So they don’t care
what’s your age. If they want to talk to you, they’ll be… they’ll be speaking…
they’ll be talking… I mean, speaking in Kristang. [Oh…] Yeah, so that’s where I
think grandparents will be good la...
6.3.5.3 Hoping for financial means and leadership
Some research participants were quick to point out financial resources as one of
the needs to be resolved, whether for the development of the PS community or language
revitalisation. A5, who has received funding for her work, is hopeful for a foundation for
Serani (Malay, “Eurasians’).
[E6.42, A5]
I would like to create a yayasan ,(Malay ‘foundation’). Yes. Uh… I already said
this and I want… I wanted to say Yayasan uh… National Serani. It would serve
to give a… the Eurasians a chance to learn their language, to acknowledge their
language, and have scholarships to go and, you know, try and preserve this
language, for future… for future generations of the community. We have to ask
the government first. The Malaysian government first. And this is the crucial time
where we should ask because it’s One Malaysia. If you are giving so much to one
race, uh… you don’t… this is just a small race and we’re asking to keep just for a
small group of us which will contribute to the uniqueness of the country, why not?
B30 similarly proposes an education foundation to be initiated for children of PS
and Portuguese descent.
[E6.43, B30]
The form must be there to put it, I, we, this association guarantee, if your child
can study, can go to university, everything will be paid for. But I don’t have the
money <chuckles> Regardless of who is your father, whether he can be a
millionaire, that is not my business. If your son are entitled to get the... your son
or your children are entitled to get that scholarship, we will give it. Provided you
are a member of this association. But you pay every month two ringgit. I’m not
asking you to pay hundred dollars a day or a hundred dollars a month, no, two
150
ringgit. So slowly we can open to all the Portuguese-descent children all over the
wor... all over Malaysia. When the fund is bigger, so the more money inside there,
the more the children will study because the parents will force the children to
study.
A7 comments on not receiving support from the committee of the PS at the time
of research, resulting in a powerless situation with little support for cultural activities and
festivals to continue when such events have been a platform for promotion of their
heritage language. Months after fieldwork, a new committee was appointed to manage
the welfare of PS group members.
[E6.44, A7]
A7: Nope, nothing. No, nothing. They... they’ve got money, they’ve got uh...
regular income because they’ve got the parking lots and all that. If we have got
that kind of thing, we could... we could really do a lot of things, you know, but we
don’t have. They have got hundreds of... thousands of Ringgit but my argument...
for example, you, were you down for San Pedro?
R: This year, no.
A7: No.
R: Last... last year I was.
A7: Last year were down. San Pedro has sunk into a... a mockery of the... of the...
what do you call it... uh... culture. It has sunk to the level of k... pasar malam
(Malay, ‘night market’) Whatever uh... elements that were... that portrait the
culture has gone missing and people that used to come to... to San Pedro because
they can relate to it, those Eurasians from afar do not come anymore because they
cannot connect with what’s happening anyway. So, this committee has, as I told
earlier on, when I was (xxx) with them also I say, “Yeah, you’re the... the... the...
the festival is mutating, you got to do something about it, you got to change it.”
So, they are… in fact, they are killing it. They have killed it last… last San Pedro
was the worst, man. It’s the worst. So that’s why we need to have changes la...
We have to do it, no choice already.
6.3.5.4 Representing and capturing the uniqueness of MPC
Those who are involved in bottom-up MPC language revitalisation efforts have
come to embrace the uniqueness of MPC more confidently. Among the non-language-
revitalisation-actors, there is also general trend towards appreciating the uniqueness of
MPC, though it may not be expressed as fully or confidently as the language revitalisation
151
actors. It was often expressed among research participants that the world outside may not
know about them and their heritage language, which is undergoing changes as more
attention is being given to the PS due to the land reclamation matters in the media. The
following excerpt demonstrates how research participants perceive their heritage
language to be and invite outsiders to get to know about them and their heritage language:
[E6.45, A3]
Yes we don’t want the language to die off, uh... and we... we’re trying to uhm...
print a book maybe. So we can uhm... it... it’s not about making money, no ah.
Because sometimes people think uh... making book means selling and making
money, no, that is not our aim. Our main aim is to let the people know that uh...
there’s so many other words that can uh... be used in our daily lives, huh, and to
use the proper word at the... uh... with a proper sentence. Uh... because sometimes
you see, they speak English in between or they speak... speak Bahasa in between.
We don’t want that to happen. We want them to speak fluent... fluently so that
uh... other people uh... when they hear... because Kristang is a beautiful language
and many people do not speak uhm... many people outside of Malacca I would
say, they don’t practice the language. But we here we do, every day we practice
the language. It’s a beautiful language if you come to learn about it, it’s very
beautiful. So we want people to appreciate the language, to know more about our
language.
6.3.6 Being Motivated to Speak and Learn MPC
Motivations of speaking and learning MPC, as gathered from Category B research
participants who would be the recipients of the bottom-up MPC language revitalisation
efforts, share similarities with motivations of initiating and participating in the efforts
among the Category A language revitalisation actors.
6.3.6.1 MPC speaking and learning as identity and self construction
MPC-speaking group members, similar to other minority groups, see their
heritage language as their identity and self construction. Group members see it as natural
for them to speak MPC, mostly accrediting PS for a MPC-speaking environment. B20 is
one of those who are in their twenties and still staying in the PS, in comparison to those
who have moved to other cities for work opportunities. Having joined a cultural group
152
and participating in cultural documentary production, he sees speaking MPC as being a
“Portuguese” (descendant):
[E6.46, B20]
R: OK. Do you think the language is important to everyone or just to certain
groups of people?
B20: No, I think to everyone ah...
R: To everyone. Ok. So when people ask you uh… “Why do you still speak
Kristang?”
B20: I will say, “It’s my language. How can I don’t speak? If you don’t speak
uh… Kristang, then you are not a Portuguese.” We are born, breed here as ah…
Portuguese, so might as well.
6.3.6.2 MPC speaking and learning as restoring and reconstructing heritage and
relationships
B20 recalls his experiences with a cultural dance troupe he used to be a part of in
E6.47 and how such experiences have provided him a MPC-speaking environment.
[E6.47, B20]
R: Did you enjoy your experience like this?
B20: Yeah, yeah, yeah. Seriously I… I do enjoy because um… mainly you get to
see places. Like when I was like thirteen, fourteen, and I… and I’m going… and
I’m going to do a show, which is take me like, forty-five minutes and I’m going
to be there for like three days. So fourteen years old going for holidays… without
parents, that’s fun. Yeah, that’s fun for me.
R: Did you enjoy getting involved in the shooting… [Yes] of the cultural dance?
B20: Yes. Not… not just shooting, we also do private uh… functions.
R: Private functions?
B20: Yeah. As long as I’m on stage, and that’s the time there… that’s the time I’ll
my best. So yeah, it’s just that…. it’s just that so fun, you know… Like, while we
do our Portuguese dance, we also actually communicate and try to make fun
each… each and other. Like… like… we’ll be like, “Oi, you swinging so slow,
quick”. And we’ll speak in Kristang. So that’s why instead of you see smiling
face, I mean, instead of seeing smiling face, you’ll be laugh… you’ll be seeing
laughing face on stage.
R: When… when you are asked to um… perform for outsiders or when you are
asked to um… be interviewed in Kristang or about the Kristang language… and
culture… did you enjoy… all this?
153
B20: I mean uh… speaking about interview, mainly… I’m talking about few years
ago, OK? Mainly that… what… what I think is I’m gonna be on TV, I’m going
to be on TV and then I don’t care who ever going to see this but that’s me... and
then secondly, I’ll be like, speaking about my roots.
R: Yes.
B20: Yeah, I’m speaking about my roots and I’m sharing people about the history
and the language, mainly language, not history la… I don’t… because I don’t
know much about history. The language, the culture, the lifestyle of um… the
Portuguese or Kristang in Portuguese settlement. So that… that is why I’m so
proud because uh… people come to learn and to know more about us… So why
don’t we just let it out and let the whole world know about us. So that is… that is
what I do and that’s how I feel. Yeah, that is… that is what I feel.
6.3.6.3 Speaking and learning MPC as group and heritage survival
In a multilingual nation such as Malaysia, minority groups have different levels
of exposure, either their exposure to the social world or the social world’s exposure to
these groups. The group in study remained isolated until the recent decades and this has
helped contributed to their heritage language (Baxter, 2012). The wish to be “seen” by
the social world to prove that they exist is expressed directly by group members such as
in the following excerpt:
[E6.48, B8]
Yeah la… do something let… let the world know that we are still exist in the
world la… [Mhm…] Or like some people think we all really pupus (Malay,
‘extinct’) ah… So we still is… beside, we still learn the language. And sometimes
we do the cultural show, like before, I used to dance for B10, so when we go,
people will think we all from Portugal. “We all, no, we all from Portuguese
settlement”. So that’s how the tourists come here and they… they get to know.
And some people they get interesting, they learn la… that’s how they learn
Portuguese.
Sometimes we do talk. We will say,” Don’t know next time our children grow up
will have or not in this kampung”. We will have... we will talk la... about that. We
will... we will never like let our culture to go away just like that. Because we have
the interest ah...
MPC, like some other heritage languages, has also become a secret language
among group members, especially in the presence of outsiders, either on social media
(E6.49) or outside PS (E6.50).
154
[E6.49, B9]
Yeah. I’ve seen my friend around Facebook la... [You have seen your friends...] I
mean… cause a lot of people don’t know about the language right? [Uh…] So... I
mean write in Kristang is like trying to tell us something secret la… [Oh… OK] I
mean you don’t want others to know ah… Yeah, something like that, so that
people around here only know la...
A7 also shared that he would deliberately speak MPC when outside the PS:
[E6.50, A7]
Of course. If you speak Malacca Portuguese among the community, there is of
course that… that… that sense of belonging, uh, and of course respect. If people
can speak Portuguese la... we so insulting la... they speak better than us, you
know... But when you speak outside the community, when you’re say, going
shopping and you want to say something that the shop people might not want to
know, we speak in Portuguese and suddenly they say, “Wah, that bugger uh can…
can speak different language, uh.” And they ask, “Hey… hey, what you speaking,
uh?” you know... that kind of thing they’re… they’re… because it sounds
different, uh... [Yes] They’re overawed by these things even now it happens, even
in Malacca also, right. Even what more we’re talking about in KL, uh, and other
places. So, sometimes I deliberately do that, uh, just to… just to… to get their
attention, just to show that… that, you know, we too have got our own language.
so I thinks it’s… it’s an… a… to me it’s always a plus factor la...
6.3.7 Explicating Relationships between Sub-processes
This section explicates the relationships between sub-processes of the MPC
language revitalisation process cycle before the next major component of the substantive
model is presented. This serves as a signpost in highlighting the relevance the
relationships between sub-processes which will be revisited in Chapter 7. Figure 6.3
illustrates the relationships of the sub-processes.
155
Types of language Continued use of
revitalisation by MPC as their
means of using are hoped to lead to heritage and identity
available resources
motivate play a
Motivations: Language part in
revitalisation as a way of
(re)connecting with language,
heritage and people
play a
part in
Reacting to language revitalisation:

can have Participation, accessibility of can affect
language revitalisation efforts and
materials, perceptions
Figure 6.3: Explicating relationships between sub-processes of MPC language

revitalisation process
As depicted in Figure 6.3, motivations to speak, learn and revitalise MPC, to
reconnect with heritage language, heritage and people, drive the types of language
revitalisation, and play a role both in the reactions towards language revitalisation efforts
and the goal of language revitalisation: the continued use and relevance of MPC as
heritage and identity. It must be emphasised again that a combination of internal and
external motivations would have led to the rise of heritage and ownership awareness,
accumulating in the overall cultural climate over time (see Section 6.3.1). While the types
of language revitalisation lead to reactions towards language revitalisations, and are
hoped to lead to the goal, the reactions towards language revitalisation naturally affect
the outcome of language revitalisation and, by extension, the goal of language
revitalisation. The next section looks at the implicit actions and meanings that emerged
from the MPC language revitalisation process cycle.
156
6.4 The Continuum of Coping Strategies
The shift in epistemology and research has led to more studies on minority group
members’ conceptions and conceptualisation of themselves in relation to their native or
heritage language, their group and their social worlds which emerge in social contexts, as
researched, particularly in linguistic anthropological studies (e.g. Dorian, 1981; Gal,
1979; Kulick, 1992) and indigenous language studies (e.g. Alfred, 1999, 2005; Smith,
1999). The experience of minority group members provide windows into understanding
the growth and development of self and group. However, as explained in Chapter 3, this
research was conducted and this thesis was written bearing in mind the traps researchers
may fall into, most particularly language essentialism, as it is not the intention of this
thesis to equate a group of people with only one linguistic identity or see linguistic
resources as the sole identity marker (Austin & Sallabank, 2014; May, 2003).
What and how group members say something and do or not do in relation to their
experience as minority, heritage language speakers reflect, among others, the immediate
concerns, agency of individuals or group in response to social worlds, and the political,
cultural and historical societal-level shift. The MPC-speaking group members draw upon
more implicit strategies to manage heritage language relevance. It is postulated that on
one end there are group members who have little or occasional connection with a MPC-
speaking heritage; on the other end, those who have initiated language revitalisation
efforts have been motivated to take things into their own hands, showing their coping
mechanisms in a more explicit way.
The continuum of coping strategies is presented in Figure 6.4 with two points on
each end: more implicit strategies and more explicit strategies. As we move from the left
point to the right point, the coping strategy becomes more explicit as group members
decide to take things into their hands and get involved in language revitalisation efforts.
This continuum explains why certain group members take up the role of getting involved
157
in language revitalisation efforts. At the end of showing or having little connection with
a MPC-speaking heritage in the continuum, group members self-accommodate and
connect with heritage by establishing occasional links, while on the other end, group
members self-differentiate and self-determine as they establish more explicit links with a
MPC-speaking heritage and come to speak about or promote MPC and speak on behalf
of the MPC-speaking group after going through negotiation and reflection within self
following exposure to possible language revitalisation ideas, inspirations and resources.
●More Implicit ●More Explicit
●Towards self-accommodating ●Towards self-differentiating
●Towards rendering control and ●Towards claiming ownership
ownership of heritage language to and control of heritage language
others
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
The continuum of coping strategies in managing relevance of heritage language
●Drawing upon temporal and spatial experiences
●Preferring ambiguity
Figure 6.4: The continuum of coping strategies
The general goal of these coping strategies is the continued identification with a
MPC-speaking heritage for a range of reasons and motivations. The coping strategies that
emerged from data have been found to echo what Dauenhauer and Dauenhauer (1998:
69) found in their research, that culture is seen as something that can be “put on and off”
158
and the connection between language use and language transmission is not seen. The
resemblance lies in how culture and heritage are drawn upon for self and group
construction and identities while for the non-language-revitalisation-actors, their
assurance by or reliance on others when it comes to confidence in the survival of their
endangered heritage language suggests the connection between individual or family
language use and language transmission.
The rest of this section discusses coping strategies that are employed along the
continuum. One of these coping strategies employed by the MPC-speaking group is
connecting with the past and future by drawing upon temporal experiences to manage
relevance of their heritage creole language which relates to and reflects self directly. How
temporal experiences are constructed have provided insights on self-constructing among
other social groups such as among people with chronic illness (e.g. Charmaz, 2002;
Corbin & Strauss, 1987), but this aspect of coping strategy is not as widely researched on
endangered-language-speaking groups, less so with a bottom-up approach and from a
perspective bridging socio-psychological and emotional experiences with endangered
language and culture studies.
Backward-looking and forward-looking are two sub-strategies of drawing upon
temporal experiences through which emotions and thoughts related to particular
experiences are evoked and brought to the foreground. It may seem obvious that such
coping strategies are employed because people usually look to the past for nostalgic
reasons, and to the future for hopes and aspirations in a basic social process, both in
majority or minority circumstances. However, why such coping strategies are employed
in the situation in study provides valuable insights. By backward-looking, group members
evoke emotions related to the past, often with a pinch of nostalgia towards the heritage
language as heard spoken since little (e.g. see E6.51); the nostalgia towards the heritage
language is closely linked to that towards the people who spoke it or the company in
159
which it was spoken. By forward-looking, group members shift focus to something in the
near future and feel positive about what may take place (e.g. see E6.52). Both sub-
strategies share one similarity: by looking to the past or the future, the present worries
and problems are less felt and the relevance of the endangered heritage language is
managed, without any necessary commitment to any present actions, via the connection
made through positive emotions and thoughts towards the endangered heritage language.
What is enacted is how the present agency of controlling the fate of their endangered
heritage language is minimised and shifted: to the past one has no control over and to the
future one may or may not have control over.
[E6.51; B9]
For now I think it’s just normal la... I mean compared to before and now,
when those days are much better la… I think. See everyone, I mean
everyone who’s older I mean they… they can speak, some very well
you know… compared to children these days and now I mean people
at my age and everyone they don’t, they are most of them are not really
fluent in Kristang as they are those days…
[E6.52; B25, R]
R: What do you feel about people uh… what do you feel about the works
done? Like the documentations of your language and your culture. What
do you feel about these works? Do you agree with these works? Do you
like to see more of these works to be done?
B25: Yeah.
R: Yeah. Um…
B25: It is good actually because you taking just to know about the Kristang
then next time it will never die, somebody knows and the thing, you know,
maybe they will try to carry on and doing something better. Mmm…
R: Mmm… OK… mmm… What do you hope people working on your

language can do for the community?
B25: I think next generation can learn from this next time.
The other coping strategy employed in managing endangered language relevance,
preferring ambiguity, can be related to avoidance strategies (Dauenhauer & Dauenhauer,
160
1998). This coping strategy allows a connection with the endangered heritage language,
whether the connection may be foregrounded, kept neutral or kept in the background,
while avoiding any possible confrontation with social power or judgement. A preference
for ambiguity such as “I don’t know” and “I’m not sure” may mask real thoughts, though
there are pre-assumptions that we must be aware: that it may not always be done so as
intentionally and Asian values need to be taken into consideration. Acknowledging this
is a step away from sounding too deterministic as this coping strategy allows a range of
conditions that prompt this strategy. Apart from preferring ambiguity as prompted by an
intention to avoid confrontation, it may also uncover any uncertainties or confusion about
associating with or talking about their endangered heritage language and that it can also
help avoid further pursuit on certain topics such as those related to their heritage or their
social or political views. This coping strategy is sometimes accompanied by another
strategy, redirecting question to others, when group members are feeling humble and not
in place to comment or act. A combination of conditions can prompt these related
strategies. Why one prefers ambiguity in social context are telling in terms of power,
social structure and ideologies. For instance, note how B8 opted for an ambiguous way
of talking about why MPC is not being learned by the younger generation in the first
exchange in E6.53.
Another coping strategy employed by group members is drawing upon others’
experiences or works on confidence in the survival of their endangered heritage language
and their continued identification with a MPC-speaking heritage. This strategy can also
be linked to having a lower expectation or broader concept on what makes speaking MPC
counts which is common in other endangered-language-speaking groups too though it
must be noted that it is a natural process for heritage language to change and take a slightly
different shape or form nonetheless. In the second exchange in E6.53, B8 employs this
161
strategy and cites how people outside PS are speaking MPC so this adds to the assurance
and confidence in the survival of MPC:
[E6.53; B8]
R: Why is it that the young people don’t want to learn the language?
B8: Don’t know la… Maybe for them it’s too hard or because we don’t
have like proper classes. Then we don’t go like school for Kristang. So
maybe they… they think the language is not important ah… [Mhm…]
R: If let’s say in the future, less and less people are speaking the language,
do you think your cul… the people’s uh… culture and traditions can still
continue without the language?
B8: I think still can la… but this… the language cannot go off la… because
not only here. We have Australian, we have Penang, we have KL also,
they have Eurasian. Maybe because they married outside… outsiders but
they still learn the language and they want to learn more… [Mhm…] Ah…
R: Do you think it’s a… a must for one to understand and speak Kristang
if he wants to be a member of the community?
B8: Not definitely la… If you don’t know also you can learn what… [OK]
Ah… They can teach you because it’s not difficult. It’s whether you want
or don’t want, that’s all.
On one end of the continuum is self-accommodating, where most non-language-
revitalisation-actors group members are less eloquent in expressing their thoughts on
topics related to their heritage language, in contrast to the group members who have taken
up the role of language revitalisation actors on the other end of the continuum. E6.54
shows how in reply to a follow-up question after the question about personal efforts of
keeping their heritage language alive was posted, a research participant shared that he
does not talk about the future of their heritage language with family and friends. Such a
reply to the same question is attested among other non-language-revitalisation-actors
group members too. The low level of eloquence or expressivity towards their heritage
language and reinforced by the preference for ambiguity among the non-language-
revitalisation-actor group members deserves attention as less-than-expected attitudes
towards their heritage language have been associated with certain perceptions or
162
interpretations: that such attitudes of theirs are associated with their laid-back lifestyle
and being “complacent” (Lee, 2010) or as mentioned earlier, “lethargic” (see E6.28).
[E6.54, B19]
R: OK. Do you talk to your friends and family about the future of
Kristang?
B19: No.
R: No. So you haven’t really, like, sat down and talked... and (have
some) chat (about it)?
B19: Uh... We don’t talk about this.
On the other end of the continuum, motivations drive certain group members into
taking charge and taking actions, taking things into their own hands. The explicit coping
strategies that distinguish language revitalisation actors from non-actors are evident in
the first three sub-processes of the MPC language revitalisation process cycle presented
above, namely motivations, methods and mobilising support, as group members decide
to take things into their hands and get involved in language revitalisation efforts. The
strategy of taking things into own hands can be aligned to the process of self-
determination as studied from a socio-cognitive process (Self-Determination Theory as
an approach to human motivation and personality in Ryan & Deci, 2000) and as related
to Indigenous Self-Determination in indigenous language studies (Crawford, 2000).
These motivations can go back a long way, tracing to what one has experienced
growing up socially and internally. Group members share about interrelated rather than
distinct motivations when sharing about why they have initiated or participated in
language revitalisation. The motivations reported by group members are channelling
inner emotions and needs, restoring and reconstructing heritage and relationships,
reclaiming ownership of heritage and landscape and work opportunities. Their
motivations revolve around one thing in common, personal interest in aligning with a self
identifying with MPC-speaking heritage in a more self-differentiating way. Generally, all
163
language revitalisation efforts can be seen as opportunities to fulfil personal interest,
either to take on personal callings, transform inner feelings or needs into actions or
influence others’ behaviours and ideologies. This personal factor has its role to play in
decisions made on the sub-processes of taking things into own hands, which are methods
and mobilising support.
6.5 Situating Findings in Wider Contexts
This section highlights the presence and interaction of wider contexts. As
presented in Chapter 2, the implications of reciprocal multilingualism are an openness to
other cultures and languages and other languages can be learned. The benefits of
reciprocal multilingualism manifest socially as being multilingual can be seen as respect
and goodwill in establishing friendly relationships; people speaking vernacular languages
are found to be proud of their linguistic competence. Similarly, Ansaldo (2009: 151)
discusses the role of multilingualism in enabling multilingual contact language speakers
(citing from the Sri Lanka Malay, Baba Malay, Makista cases) become mediators or
power-brokerage between local society and colonial structures. The accumulating
ideologies since the pre-colonial period continue to interact with ideologies from the
colonial periods, and from the present and future. These ideologies may take on newer
packaging or restructuring, and the elements and contents that accumulate and interact
are never and will never be static and permanent. The interactions between ideologies are
further discussed in Chapter 7. This section situates the MPC language revitalisation
process cycle and the continuum of coping strategies in wider contexts.
164
Situated in wider contexts: social, historical and global
↑
What is this part of social life a part of?
↑
Representing a part of social life
↑
A part of?
↑
Motivations: The extent of aligning with a self identifying with heritage
↑
Why?
↑
Language revitalisation as a site for doing things with language
Figure 6.5: Situating the MPC language revitalisation process cycle and the
continuum of coping strategies in wider contexts
Figure 6.5 illustrates how from approaching the experiences and expressivity of
the MPC-speaking group members in relation to MPC language revitalisation, language
revitalisation becomes a site for doing things with language, as depicted in the continuum
of coping strategies. The motivations behind the coping strategies which are implicit in
the more explicit sub-processes in the MPC language revitalisation process cycle are
traced to the extent of aligning with a self identifying with a MPC-speaking heritage.
These motivations that lead to the conceptions and conceptualisations among group
members in constructing a part of their social life have to be situated in the wider contexts.
The social contexts refer to the multilingual and multicultural society. The historical
contexts include the pre-colonial, colonial, post-colonial and contemporary development,
as demonstrated in Chapter 2. The global contexts include the overall cultural climate and
epistemological shifts, as discussed in Chapter 3. The interactions between the wider
contexts will be discussed in relation to the implications on language-related matters in
Chapter 7.
165
6.6 Close-to-heart Matters and Peoplehood
This section serves as an attempt in approaching close-to-heart matters for the PS
MPC-speaking group members and how these can be related to peoplehood. In
considering the motivations of speaking, learning and revitalising MPC, the motivations
behind aligning with a self identifying with a MPC-speaking heritage are identified. In
doing so, the processes of speaking, learning and revitalising MPC are related to the
presence of a larger sense of being part of the MPC-speaking group members. What make
up the larger sense of being part of the MPC-speaking heritage leads to the considerations
on what make them who they are as a group of people. The notion of peoplehood is widely
discussed in indigenous studies. In the research process, there were attempts to understand
the PS MPC-speaking group members’ values and matters that are close to the people’s
heart in conversations but these values and matters were not able to be conceptualised
beyond a superficial examination until a later stage of the research process. It has to be
pointed out that the social and historical development of the indigenous and the people
who identify with a contact language situation are essentially different.
However, being contact-language-speakers should not be taken as a given as to
why they have less of what make up their peoplehood, as a new society speaking a new
language (in the sense of Ansaldo, 2009). The reasons discussed about why contact
languages are understudied in research, namely the shorter history timeline, the lack of
autonomy and the pressure to accommodate (Bartens, 2005; Garett, 2006; O’Shannesy,
2011), do not mean contact-language-speakers are any less than other language speakers,
a point affirmed in an evolutionary framework as related to how contact language
situations are not exceptional but rather, are natural evolution (Ansaldo, 2009; Mufwene,
2001, 2003, 2013). The re-examination of values and matters important to the PS MPC-
speaking group members was triggered when considering what could possibly reconcile
the dynamics of voices and views as will be discussed in Chapter 7.
166
As illustrated in Figure 6.6, the larger sense of being part of the MPC-speaking
heritage goes beyond speaking, learning and revitalising MPC and goes back to what
make them identify with the heritage. These close-to-heart matters, abstracted as larger
parts in life, constitute the peoplehood of the MPC-speaking group members.
Towards aligning with macro settings
Towards aligning with a MPC-speaking heritage

Close-to-heart
matters:
peoplehood
↑
Language,
Way-of-life,
History,
Ceremony,
Place/community
Figure 6.6: Close-to-heart matters and peoplehood
In Figure 6.6, place or community, specifically for the PS MPC-speaking group
members, refers to the presence of PS (i.e. geographically and physically) and of the PS
community (i.e. the people, the network, the communities of practice). For MPC-speaking
group members, though not directly dealt with in the present study, the place and
community can refer to their respective communities of practice and network, which can
also include the digital space and social media. Similarly, the PS MPC-speaking group
167
members are also establishing a voice and space in the digital space and social media.
The ceremony refers to cultural (and religious) practices and celebrations. The history
constitutes the socio-historical development that has made them who they are. The way-
of-life is essentially made up by practices and elements from their everyday life, including
food and music. The language is the linguistic resources in which the peoplehood can be
manifested, in complementing other larger parts of what make up the peoplehood of the
MPC-speaking group members. These larger parts of the peoplehood are explicitly or
implicitly manifested throughout the present study. The consideration of the peoplehood
in relation to language revitalisation is discussed in Chapter 7.
6.7 Summary
This chapter concludes with a cleaned up version of the illustration of the
substantive model of managing heritage language relevance which will be discussed in
relation to the meanings of MPC language revitalisation in Chapter 7. In Figure 6.7, the
substantive model comprises four major components. The arrows suggest the source and
destination or cause and effect relationships as usually indicated by arrows. Note that the
major component that was established towards the end of research process after the other
three major components were identified is now integrated as the third major component.
This is because close-to-heart matters and peoplehood, like other micro-processes, feed
into and are in response or resistance to the wider contexts.
168
Major Component 4
Contexts: multilingual, interaction of
culture and ideologies
Major Component 3
Close-to-heart matters, peoplehood
Major Component 2
The continuum of coping strategies
Major Component 1
MPC language revitalisation process cycle
Figure 6.7: A substantive model of managing heritage language relevance
Against local language revitalisation efforts (Major component 1) and the wider
contexts, research participants align with a particular sense of self: a self that identifies or
identifies to a lesser degree, since few things are ever black or white, a MPC-speaking
heritage. The motivations and extent of such aligning manifest in the managing of the
relevance of MPC-speaking heritage (Major component 2) and for those who identify
with the PS (as are most participants since the present study focuses on the PS MPC-
speaking group members), being part of the PS MPC-speaking group members. Close-to-
heart matters in terms of peoplehood, i.e. being part of the people who identify with a
(PS) MPC-speaking heritage (Major component 3), support and complement each other
while making up the larger sense of MPC-speaking heritage and identity, as a part of their
169
social life and crucial features of presence (in the sense of Charmaz, 2014) against the
wider contexts. In the discussion in Chapter 7 on what can be drawn from the substantive
model over a range of matters related to language and language revitalisation, these major
components in the substantive model will be discussed.
170
CHAPTER 7: DISCUSSION
7.1 Introduction
As introduced in Chapter 1, the process of managing heritage language relevance
emerged strongly to capture research participants’ experience as reconstructed in their
discourse and co-constructed with researcher, situated against the wider multilingual and
postcolonial context and local language revitalisation efforts. Such a theoretical progress
towards coping strategies of the group in study is in line with the quest of a social process
or central phenomenon as pursued in a Grounded Theory study (Charmaz, 2006, 2014),
while the outcome of research can be related to coping strategies as employed in other
social processes or phenomena. The first research question is addressed in the previous
chapter: How is MPC relevance managed by negotiating and constructing its meanings
against the backdrop of the language revitalisation process and the wider multilingual and
post-colonial backdrop? Chapter 6 presents a substantive model on how MPC-speaking
group members manage the relevance of their endangered heritage language as
illuminated by:
i. the sub-processes filling up the MPC language revitalisation process cycle,
ii. the continuum of coping strategies
iii. the matters close to the heart of the people
iv. the wider contexts
This chapter discusses what can be drawn from the substantive model of managing
heritage language relevance, from the sub-processes, coping strategies, outcomes and
ideologies from wider contexts as emerged in MPC language revitalisation process. To
weave the four major categories of the substantive model into a coherent analysis, and to
string the interdisciplinary concepts (see Chapter 3 for major concepts drawn from
disciplines including linguistic anthropology, sociolinguistics, an ecological framework,
171
an evolutionary framework, language revitalisation) together as a coherent framework, at
the core of the analysis, lies three dimensions: discourses, ideologies and identities. As
explained in Chapter 3, these three dimensions are connected via:
i. the construction of language- and heritage-related experience as a part of
social life, namely language endangerment and language revitalisation, in
discourses (though not limited only to verbal discourses) in response to a
wider process of social, cultural and political development;
ii. the relationship between mutually constitutive discourses, ideologies and
identities;
iii. the social basis and political power contributing to the constructedness of
the language in study and of the experience of the people in study, bearing
in mind that the representation of an aspect of social life and ideologies via
discourses has to be understood against the power relations in the wider
context.
The notion of social motivation, the drive behind social processes and social
representation which themselves also drive further motivations, speaks to all social
processes. Motivation here is used in relation to the meaning of acts of identity as
discussed by Croft (2003) and of identity or multiple alignments discussed by Ansaldo
(2009; see Chapter 3), both coming from an evolutionary framework. This thesis attempts
to approach and reconcile the three dimensions:
i. the conceptions and conceptualisations of experiences and coping strategies
(discourses, though experiences and coping strategies discussed in this
thesis also include actions in language revitalisation),
ii. the identifying of the underlying tensions, disconnect between what is said
and what is done, and goals and needs (ideologies),
172
iii. the discovering of what choices have been made and identities aligned with
(identities).
As stated in Chapter 3, although the present study deals with evaluating bottom-
up MPC language revitalisation efforts up to a certain extent, the nature and ideologies of
evaluating here are not strictly evaluating in terms of success rate and predicting vitality.
This is because the MPC language revitalisation efforts are fairly recent and mostly
sporadic to date (e.g. mostly individual or group’s efforts, on-and-off in reality, follow-
up efforts could take a long time), and thus, do not make a suitable candidate for a
longitudinal evaluation at the time of research. Furthermore, as mentioned in Chapter 1,
it was observed prior to and during the conduct of the present study that not many research
participants participated in or knew much about the MPC language revitalisation efforts.
However, a bigger consideration is how strict and premature evaluations that do not
consider the context and environment of the language and group in study could leave
negative impacts on the group and the language revitalisation efforts. As such, a better
way of looking at the MPC language revitalisation would be to understand the experiences
of the group members and make propositions for language revitalisation based on data by
connecting implications of findings over a range of interrelated matters. In search of
possible explanations of implications of findings, this chapter draws on language
evolutionary framework (Ansaldo, 2009; Croft, 2003; Mufwene, 2001, 2003, 2013) in
going beyond the link between language and identity though the framework is also drawn
upon where relevant in Chapter 3, allowing a fuller picture of the interaction between
language contact, language endangerment and language revitalisation, all of which are
social processes in which humans interact with their ecology and social powers.
The four major categories of the substantive model are weaved into the discussion
to examine the strategies and sub-processes in light of literature (e.g. factors, variables,
173
considerations and practices in language revitalisation), and to discuss the prospects of
keeping MPC relevant. As presented in Chapter 6, the coping strategies of managing the
relevance of MPC can be approached as a continuum, with more implicit strategies on
one end and more explicit strategies on the other end. The more implicit strategies and
more explicit strategies are similar to accommodation and differentiation through
language use (Ansaldo, 2009). Along the continuum, coping strategies can be more
ambivalent for reasons such as avoiding confrontation and rendering or refuting control
to others. The sub-processes of the MPC language revitalisation process cycle are situated
in a larger context in the present discussion.
There are three parts to the present discussion. The first part of the discussion in
this chapter discusses the meanings of and evaluates the MPC language revitalisation
efforts thus far. The focus is on the meanings of managing relevance of MPC against the
language revitalisation process cycle: what the efforts could mean to those involved, and
as well as to those on the recipient side of the efforts, rather than strictly judging or
predicting language vitality and revitalisation efforts success. The second part discusses
the dynamics as emerged in the interwoven (i) discourses and (ii) coping strategies over
a range of related matters: language purism, language ownership, literacy and post-
colonial planning, language acquisition, language transmission and contemporary trends.
The third part discusses what can be drawn from the present study in relation to language
revitalisation.
7.2 Meanings of MPC Language Revitalisation Efforts
Language revitalisation is a manifestation of language planning but is not limited
to only language in terms of its components and effects (Chapter 3). In search of ways of
framing and evaluating the MPC language revitalisation in a way suitable for the case in
study, this section takes cue from King (2001) who in turn draws from Cooper’s (1989)
174
accounting scheme for language planning activities in framing the Saraguro language
revitalisation. Such a decision is based on the accounting scheme’s focus on grassroots
activities, and Cooper’s aligning language planning with types of influence to behaviours
instead of outright change. Cooper puts forward a definition of language planning after
reviewing previous definitions, who plans what for whom by how? King’s (2001: 205)
condensation of Cooper’s accounting scheme phrased as eight sub-questions is referred
to below:
(i) What actors, (ii) attempt to influence what behaviours, (iii) of which people,
(iv) for what ends, (v) under what conditions, (vi) by what means, (vii) through
what decision making process, (viii) with what effect?
In relation to the MPC case, each component is discussed in the following:
i. What actors
MPC language revitalisation efforts are sporadic, spontaneous and initiated
by interested individuals or individuals associated with or forming a group.
These individuals are motivated by a range and a combination of interrelated
internal and external motivations, as presented in Chapter 6, including
personal interest or pursuit (e.g. reclaiming ownership of heritage and
community, reconnecting with heritage, reconnecting with social space-
time using MPC) and community-external factors (e.g. being exposed to
other minority groups’ experience, receiving recognition on efforts, being
funded). These individuals stand out from other group members by
motivations that drive them to take the initiative to take things into control
and exhibit a stronger sense of agency, empowerment, self-determination
and self-differentiation via their actions and discourses. Their coping
strategies in managing the relevance of their heritage language are more
175
explicit in comparison to group members who are not involved in language
revitalisation. Among these individuals, there are those whose background
is related to how they approach MPC language revitalisation efforts (e.g.
qualification and experience in teaching, experience in representing the
MPC-speaking heritage in public and world forums such as in international
conferences) though all individuals’ background and experience are valued.
Given more specific qualification and experience, some individuals
demonstrate leadership qualities or can work individually in a self-
motivated way. All individuals enjoy the communities of practice and social
space-time that allow them to cross temporal and spatial borders (e.g. being
nostalgic, looking to the future, reigniting familial or good experience with
MPC) to reconnect with their heritage.
ii. What behaviours
Similar to the case of most minority groups, there is no single one source of
language planning activity, language planning goal or activity (e.g. King,
2001). As efforts are sporadic and spontaneous, goals depend on individuals
or groups. Since the efforts are often done in isolation, and actions and goals
of efforts are often not made known to others other than their target
audience, there have been similarities in the actions and goals of efforts,
such as compiling MPC words and materials. The efforts aim generally to
generate interest in speaking and learning MPC with some attempting to
generate both interest and fun in speaking and learning MPC. The goal of
language transmission is less explicit as the focus is on getting the younger
generation to learn basic MPC even though there were views expressed by
research participants to engage parents in language activities. The focus on
176
the connection between language use and language transmission (in the
sense as referred to by Dauenhauer & Dauenhauer, 1998) was not
foregrounded.
iii. Of which people
Most efforts focus on getting children and teenagers to learn MPC though
adults are also welcomed. The general perception is children still have the
capacity to learn MPC while teenagers shy away from speaking MPC. The
annual activities (e.g. festival performances including those of San Pedro
and Christmas) are perceived to be the public sphere to demonstrate that the
younger generation, especially children, are still capable of speaking MPC
though in most cases, the performances in which MPC is used are scripted
and checked by individuals who are deemed qualified to do so. Such an
orientation is also observed in language revitalisation, in the hope that MPC
use among the younger generation can encourage more people to speak
MPC. At the time of research, the recipient group members were observed
to be less aware of or not informed on the MPC language revitalisation
efforts; those who were aware of the efforts did not know much about the
efforts.
iv. For what ends
Although there is no consensus on this as there is no one single body which
reconciles goals and needs, the general goal is keeping MPC relevant as part
of the people’s heritage and identity or seen conversely, manifesting their
heritage and identity through MPC. More MPC resources, which range from
matching the local variety more accurately, portraying the “old” MPC more
177
accurately (e.g. words and expressions used by the older generations) or
looking for a more “correct” portrayal of MPC (e.g. drawing from European
Portuguese vocabulary, using Malay words was deemed less “correct”), are
hoped to be created.
v. Under what conditions
The conditions that have encouraged the bottom-up language revitalisation
efforts include the commemoration of the arrival of the Portuguese in
Malacca in 1511 and cultural activities and festivals (e.g. San Pedro and San
Juan festivals) that promote the use of at least symbolic use of MPC in
public spheres and more MPC use in social space-time among group
members (either from the PS or outside PS who come to PS for the cultural
activities and celebrations) and enforce the role MPC plays as part of the
people’s heritage. The portrayal of the PS and the PS MPC-speaking group
in tourism in Malacca and funds (though not consistent from year to year,
see Chapter 2) has drawn interest to the cultural activities and celebrations
in the PS. Such interest, giving a boost to MPC prestige and image, not only
flow from tourists but also people who identify themselves with the same
heritage but have grown up in or moved to other places (e.g. Penang,
Singapore, Melbourne).
vi. By what means
The MPC language revitalisation efforts to date manifest in three forms:
language classes, the creation of MPC materials and the language-speaking
group, mostly self-determined and the extent of engaging group members
varies. Based on reactions towards these language revitalisation efforts at
178
the time of study (Chapter 6), the engagement with group members is
minimal to medium (language classes in 2011-2012). Language efforts are
complemented as being part of larger cultural activities, festival celebrations
or conferences and campaigns to raise awareness on heritage- and PS-
related matters.
vii. Through what decision making process
The orientation of learning MPC is more institutional (e.g. language classes)
and may focus on a certain variety that is deemed culturally “correct” or
“authentic” when the efforts target the younger generation. Even in more
casual settings, conversations in MPC also show an orientation in search of
the “old” words or expressions as used by the older generation which are no
longer used by the younger generations. There would be discussions among
group members on how some words are Malay or from other languages and
how those “old” words used to be used in place of the contemporary
vocabulary.
viii. With what effect
At the time of research, the fairly recent MPC language revitalisation efforts
were not suitable for a longitudinal evaluation. The more dated efforts
produced MPC materials but mainly target audience outside the PS which
are out of the scope of this thesis. However, the MPC language revitalisation
efforts have, along with complementing cultural activities, heightened
interest in MPC, which by no means refutes that the interest in MPC was in
presence all along. It could be said that interest in MPC, after more language
revitalisation efforts are undertaken, has come to be expressed in a more
179
explicit way, in consistent with a shift towards more explicit coping
strategies if group members are more self-differentiated and self-
empowered in matters related to their heritage. Heightened interest in MPC
was observed in the use of MPC in social media, and in more MPC use in
public spheres (e.g. conferences, public talks) and private spheres (e.g. more
MPC-speaking sessions were reported in the conduct of research), and
among both MPC-speaking group members in the PS and outside PS. The
efforts also contribute to the overall culture climate (Dorian, 1987) and are
perceived to be able to transmit a part of culture and traditional way-of-life.
This thesis adds to the growing acknowledgment and recognition of on-the-
ground language revitalisation efforts initiated by minority group members, however big
or small scale, as the efforts bear witness to self-determination and empowerment, not
only linguistically but also generally in all aspects of a group. Drawing upon
Constructivist Grounded Theory (Chapter 4 and 5) has allowed, in addition to the focus
on meanings and actions, the unfolding of temporal sequences as they are linked in a
process and lead to change as single events become linked as part of a larger whole
(Charmaz, 2014). Linking temporal sequences leads to filling up the sub-processes of the
language revitalisation process: from how it begins to how it is perceived and received
and where it may lead.
As emerged in data, motivations, be it of speaking, learning or revitalising MPC,
are important for understanding the MPC language revitalisation process, which also give
indications on group members’ interaction with the social structure. Via motivations,
indications are also given on individuals’ relationship with group members and with the
social space-time using MPC. Motivations drive construction of identities and ideologies
180
in reaction to ecology while they are simultaneously driven by identities and ideologies
alignment and construction.
The motivations driving the MPC language revitalisation efforts revolve around
keeping MPC relevant in either the language revitalisation actors’ life and for those who
reach out to other group members, the group’s daily life. It is expressed among research
participants that it is hoped that MPC will be spoken and kept relevant in daily life. The
MPC language revitalisation actors mostly think positively of the prospects of keeping
MPC relevant among the PS MPC-speaking group. Such views should be considered
against a bigger picture of the daily life of the PS MPC-speaking group where MPC,
though perceived to be spoken less among the younger generations, can be found or heard
in the daily events (e.g. spoken within family and neighbourhood) and events (e.g. funeral
and mass). The seemingly active and receptive use of MPC in the PS in contrast to the
lack of intergenerational language transmission is possibly one of the reasons why a
heritage language labelled as endangered by researchers is getting the treatment as it has
received among its language users, the way it has always been: spoken and transmitted
orally and informally.
Research participants who are on the recipient side of the MPC language
revitalisation efforts find solace in the idea that their language is being taken care of by
someone, even more so by someone from their own. Dorian (1998) notes how it is almost
easier to insist on the importance of language to heritage and identity in settings where
the ancestral language is entirely lost than in settings where it’s retained by a relatively
small number. Dorian (1987) puts forward four possible reasons for undertaking language
revitalisation efforts even when the success of the efforts may be deemed low at the
outright: (i) internalised negative attitudes, (ii) the transmission of traditional cultural
values and ways of life, (iii) economic, and (iv) the overall cultural climate. The
181
motivations behind MPC language revitalisation share all though in terms of economic,
only a fairly small portion of the group members are affected.
Chapter 6 presents a substantive model. This model can be referred to in
understanding the meanings of bottom-up MPC language revitalisation and strategies in
managing relevance of MPC. The meanings of language revitalisation are explicated in
the relationships between codes, categories and concepts, and later between the major
components of the substantive model. Immediate concerns, conceptions and
conceptualisations of experience, identity alignment and ideologies are uncovered in
coping strategies through language use and actions. As presented in Chapter 6, research
participants who are motivated to take things into their own hands employ explicit
strategies to keep MPC relevant in everyday life by creating more social-space time for
MPC use. To research participants who employ implicit strategies in drawing on MPC
relevance to construct self and identities, the social space-time for MPC use is
considerably more limited in that there appears to be a time and space for MPC. Recall
how school children are thought to have “no time” for MPC language classes or how
language revitalisation actors are perceived to “have the time” for language revitalisation
efforts (see Chapter 6).
The connection between language and culture remains a site for MPC group
members to make sense of their experience as individuals and as group members in
relation to the meaning of their presence and interaction with social worlds, and to
negotiate and construct their identities. That cultural activities are often included as part
of language revitalisation, or language revitalisation is seen as part of cultural activities
by language revitalisation actors, demonstrates the intertwined nature of the language-
cultural nexus. Such demonstration is not the same as saying a group’s culture cannot
survive without their heritage language, as research shows otherwise (see Pillai & Khan,
2011). A more relevant way of looking at this can be drawn from Fishman (1989: 399)
182
who contends that “language always exists in a culture matrix and that the matrix rather
than the language is the point at which support is most needed”, as discussed in Chapter
3. The need to support the overall development of minority groups and not just the
language has also been pointed out in Chapter 3 (May, 2003; Mufwene, 2003;
Mühlhäusler, 2003).
In general, the MPC language revitalisation process cycle presented in Chapter 6
demonstrates the recognition of MPC as part of the group’s heritage and identity and how
the relevance of MPC is managed. Group members find meanings in and make meanings
out of a part of their social life, that of dealing with language evolution and language
revitalisation. The general meanings revolve around the language-cultural nexus, apart
from the language-ideological aspects that will be examined in the next section, as it is
hoped that MPC continues to be relevant to the group members as part of their heritage
and identities.
7.3 Examining Discourses and Coping Strategies
The previous section looks at the salient meanings of MPC language revitalisation
as put into perspectives. In contrast, this section discusses and highlights the dynamics of
meanings of language revitalisation among PS MPC-speaking group members to address
the mismatch between language revitalisation efforts and reactions and between positive
perceptions of heritage language and actual practices. To allow the dynamics of meanings
to show, this section examines discourses and coping strategies over a range of
interrelated matters. Some of those discussed have been reported elsewhere or even
expected in similar circumstances though every contact language situation is unique. This
has to be understood against the ideologies (e.g. pre-colonial, colonial, nation-state) that
have been deeply ingrained and become part of the identities of some minority groups,
leaving impacts and traces on the people’s conceptions and conceptualisations of what
183
should and should not be. The discussion below can be seen as the overall effects of and
catalysts of motivations underlying social processes. The concepts discussed and
exemplified are interrelated as a web of the present circumstances of past development
and can be future determining factors. Discourses and coping strategies on the ground are
connected to social motivations and processes. This connection will foreground which
identity out of multiple identities and ideologies to align with, or are at play or interact.
The understanding of a social aspect of the group in study in managing the relevance of
their heritage language provides windows into how members continue to construct the
new society that was formed from a range of heritage societies in settlement colonies
(Mufwene, 2001) while conforming to colonial ideologies, and shaping and reshaping
new society ideologies. The multiple, simultaneous and continuous interactions of pre-
colonial, colonial, new society and contemporary ideologies contribute to the nature of
the make-up of the language (think lexical, substance and schematic linguime as
discussed by Croft, 2003), of the group of people identifying with a language and of the
society in which contact languages develop.
As agency or motivation-based drive (in terms of identity) is recognised behind
all language processes, and it is evident that it is “a matter of choice” (Croft, 2003: 14), it
can be reasoned that what can be done in language revitalisation is also, as it follows, a
matter of choice and agency matters, despite continuous subordinating to, resisting and
interacting with social powers and structure. However, to recognise the agency or
motivation-based drive behind language processes is not the same as saying speakers are
always making conscious decisions to speak or not speak a language. It is acknowledged
that, though there have been cases of conscious cases of giving up languages due to
political and survival reasons (e.g. genocide, disaster or illness), research has shown that
in language processes such as language shift and language loss, language speakers may
not consciously make decisions to give up on a language (Mufwene, 2003). Language
184
revitalisation thus becomes complex and multifaceted, having to consider the reality of
the role of a heritage language in the present socio-economic systems (Mufwene, 2003;
see also Dorian, 1998, on a similar stance on how navigating by traditional means is
harder compared to navigating by modern means), while attempting to influence
behaviours and ideologies at the psychological level which are hoped to manifest in
practice, either consciously or subconsciously. The underlying dynamic ideologies that
are at play are manifested through the coping strategies used in managing relevance of
MPC: self-differentiating (e.g. claiming ownership explicitly), self-accommodating,
preferring ambiguity and rendering control of matters such as heritage language efforts
to others and drawing upon temporal and spatial experiences, as examined in the next
section.
7.3.1 Language Purism
This section examines perceptions towards possible varieties of MPC and the way
perceptions are affected by purism before how shifts towards and away from purism are
at play against language revitalisation are discussed. Language purism “can be seen to
represent a form of conservatism, a harking back to the favoured forms or styles of earlier
times” (Dorian, 1994: 480). Sarkissian (1997, 2005) has discussed how the elements of
Portugueseness is perceived and manifests in relation to the PS MPC-speaking group
members and a strand of purism is present in the make-up of the Portugueseness.
Historically, there has been a division between the upper class, also known as the
upper tens, who bear Dutch or British family names though some have Portuguese family
names, and the less well-off fishermen in the PS, who mostly have Portuguese family
names but Dutch and British family names can also be found. The historical account
records that the PS was built for the less well-off Portuguese or Eurasian descendants
(Baxter, 2012). Apart from distinct family names, the upper tens are associated with
185
speaking English as their first language, their employment by the British during British
era for white-collar jobs and literacy. The division between the upper tens and the PS
residents that lies in family heritage, socio-economic conditions, literacy level and home
language then construct the difference in social structure. Among the PS MPC-speaking
group members, the division between the upper tens and the PS residents is still noticeable
albeit in a static form of portrayal of the relationship between the upper tens and the PS
residents. This static account has been passed down from previous generations and
internalised and socialised as a key division among the MPC-speaking group members.
The division between classes has perhaps blurred in the contemporary times as the
characteristics used to associate the classes with have mellowed down in a way. Such a
trend echoes how categories are social constructs and when the ecologies in which the
categories are constructed are undergoing shifts, so are the constructed categories
(Ansaldo, 2009; Mufwene, 2001, 2008). Reconnecting with a MPC-speaking heritage and
way-of-life has been evident in the past few years, especially more so when the arrival of
Portuguese in Malacca in 1511 was commemorated via mass celebrations in 2011
(Chapter 1). Shifts in perceptions and ideologies are encouraged by the global and
epistemological shifts towards embracing minority language rights and multilingualism
(Chapter 3). After all, all MPC-speaking group members, regardless of the historical
division, have come to be associated with some common grounds, including English
command, faith, festivals, food and their kind and helpful characteristics (Chapter 2). The
later is demonstrated by E7.1 who recalled the value that has been passed down from the
older generations among the PS MPC-speaking group members. The present study is also
a manifestation of the good will and assistance from the PS community, similar to how
fieldwork is made possible in other minority language studies.
186
[E7.1, B25]
Say like June the twenty-third. We have candles litted up, night, in our houses.
Uh... like Christmas we all get together... [Hmm...] The value of we Kristang what.
We never say that, you know, you have to make appointment to see us, you can
just pop in anytime you like. Ah… and we that type... we never say like, even how
poor we are also, when you come time for lunch or what, we will never say that,
“No, we cook enough for us.” No, come and join us, whatever we have, we... Not
to say very generous, we are taught to be like that, we are brought up to be like
that, ah...
Like other groups, MPC-speaking group members have their similarities and
differences as discussed above. Their perception of whether there are dialects or sub-
varieties of MPC is relevant to the present discussion on language purism. Most PS MPC-
speaking group members perceive that MPC is the only distinct variety of its own,
meaning there are no other distinct dialects or sub-varieties. However, according to some
research participants, especially those involved in language revitalisation or those who
had prior exposure to the notion of dialects or varieties of language, differences in MPC-
speaking due to geographical factor (e.g. having grown up in different parts of Malacca,
such as in the PS, Praya Lane or Tengkerah) are reported in vocabulary and pronunciation
though the level of distinction is perceived to be minimal. A closer examination relates
the historical division between group members discussed in the previous paragraph to the
geographical factor though it was not usually mentioned outright by research participants.
The link between the historical division and geographical factor is based on how group
members associated with different social statuses and structure have resided in different
locations. The comparison between the PS and areas outside PS is also extended to their
ways-of-life, notably food though it is noted that even in the PS, every house or every
cook has a recipe of their own for the dishes that have come to be associated with their
heritage, for instance, curry devil. Research participants were briefly introduced about the
concept of dialects and varieties so that they could understand the questions directed at
exploring their perceptions on possible MPC language varieties. For those who did not
187
have prior exposure to the notion of dialects or varieties of language, the same response
was given after follow-up questions were posted to exemplify language and its dialects
or varieties: that to them, there was only one variety of MPC. For those who thought
otherwise, slight differences in word pronunciation or differences in words and
expressions were mentioned. For instance, the use of the word keteping (said to have
Malay influence) to refer to crabs, as used in Tengkerah, was contrasted to kanggrezu
used in the PS, Ujong Pasir and Praya Lane. Some research participants also pointed to
the relation of MPC to other Portuguese or Portuguese-based varieties. For instance, MPC
and the local Portuguese variety spoken in Timor Leste was compared by a research
participant who perceived the two varieties to be much intelligible based on what he had
heard.
In PS, a division between a more “antique”, pure and authentic MPC variety and
a more “mixed” version was perceived among research participants. Sometimes, the
distinction was made between the “deep MPC spoken by the older generation” and the
“simple” MPC spoken by the younger generations. The old, deep and authentic MPC
version is valued by all generations, showing a hint of nostalgia as also reported by other
researchers (e.g. Hill & Hill, 1986). While an old, deep and authentic MPC version is
idealised and valued, speaking differently from the perceived “original” MPC speech is
perceived to be slightly more negative in comparison in this sense. E7.2 is one of the
instances in which research participants perceive a move away from the “original” MPC
speech as negative when one moves away from the concentrated MPC-speaking PS.
[E 7.2, A1]
No, no, because when that place which fully populated is different. When some
of the population move ah… they become less. They tend to make mistakes and
nobody to correct them. Here we got more people use same words, so the words
are still original la...
(=No, no, because when a place is fully populated with MPC-speaking population,
it is different. When some move away from the concentrated area, they become
less proficient. They tend to make mistakes and there is no one to correct them.
Here in the PS, there are more people using the same words, so the words are still
original)
188
This slightly negative perception of language change and language evolution,
however, clashes with group members’ positive perceptions of social mobility and
continuous drawing on their association with English command: that for making a living
and keeping up with the social worlds. Such a clash between ideologies among minority
groups has also been reported by Marquis and Sallabank (2013) who distinguish between
static and dynamic ideologies (Chapter 3). Group members are aware of how English can
bring opportunities to them. The mixedness and constructedness that make MPC a new
language to a new society are not socialised as something normal and natural to most
group members. Such perceptions are manifestations of the colonial ideologies and
nation-state ideologies. A shift in ideologies, however, is evident among group members
involved in language revitalisation, who are driven by a range of personal, global and
societal-level motivations (Chapter 6) and have either been exposed to or taken the
initiative to research on work and materials on MPC.
Views on language mixing are varied. Similar to other cases that have been
reported (e.g. Sallabank, 2013), there are hopes expressed towards a seemingly more
“pure” version of MPC, with less loanwords and more words and expressions used by the
older generations. Parents, who perceive that their children and their children’s peers do
not speak MPC as much as they should or some are even perceived to not understand
MPC though such judgments are subjective to personal ideas on good or proficient MPC
speakers. Receptive skills of MPC appear to be less valued when in contrast to speaking
skills. However, if we consider how the younger generations are perceived by the older
generations as not being able to understand MPC, receptive skills then become more
valued when it is found out or compared that the younger group members can actually
understand MPC. The views expressed by the PS younger generation also vary,
depending on the ecology and socialisation they have experienced. Inevitably, some of
189
them might have also expressed views that are perceived to be culturally correct or as
expected of them to live up to the name of being a Kristang or Portuguese (Eurasian).
There are two trends of perceptions towards the origin and nature of MPC among
the respondents. MPC is mistakenly perceived by some (i) to have mainly retained the
Portuguese spoken in the 16th century: “we are speaking the ancient Portuguese language
here” or (ii) to be a simplified version of Portuguese with local flavours: “we speak
Kristang, we don’t speak Portuguese”. That MPC is perceived synchronically instead of
diachronically is observed in how many research participants who are not involved in
language revitalisation do not talk about the future of their heritage language among
themselves. Similar to other minority groups, the PS group members look up to their
elders as a point of reference in terms of speaking MPC fluently. For one to be perceived
to be a good MPC, speaking the same speech as the elders is one of the criteria, alongside
one’s family background (having grown up in the Portuguese Settlement or not, having
been associated with people perceived to be good MPC speakers or not). This criterion is
then extended to the language ownership and roles in language revitalisation as noted in
how some research participants expressed that “if we want to teach, we must teach
properly”. A hybrid language bears the witness to languages in contact though it is
somehow equated to language decay in colonial ideologies, along with other ideologies
that reinforce the idea of a hybrid language being inadequate to be on par with “real”
languages, including the lack of literacy (see discussion on literacy below). The
diachronic development of a hybrid language like MPC has little space in the colonial
ideologies as speaking differently from the older generations’ speech is perceived to be
negative instead of language change or evolution.
What also accompanies and underlies the perception among group members
towards seeing the elders as a point of reference of good speakers is that the elders are
perceived to be the legitimate faces of MPC. It was often to hear research participants
190
suggest getting the elders to teach MPC to the younger generations; both institutional and
informal settings were suggested in learning MPC from the elders. This is related to
language ownership which will be discussed in the next section.
Purist views are observed to limited to a small but influential or well-respected
segment of people. Such views are in contrast to the creativity, agency and development
demonstrated on language users’ part, even though others or the language speakers may
perceive the MPC speech spoken by the younger generation to be “simple”. Although
more researchers have come to recognise the relevance of diachronic models that embrace
language evolution and change as natural and normal, language speakers may continue to
see language as “synchronic text-based code and lexicon” (Anderson, 2009: 71). This is
especially relevant to our understanding of the formation of a new language and new
society in language contact situation, particularly with new social order brought about by
a new political order that then is socialised into the new society. The outcome of the
language contact situation, including the language, society, social order or the overt or
underlying ideologies and identities could be perceived by the new group members and
members of their social worlds to be static and synchronic instead of fluid and diachronic.
Categories are, after all, inherently static constructs, and should not influence our
understanding of diachronic processes (Ansaldo, 2009; Mufwene, 2001, 2008). With such
understandings about group members’ possible different degrees of views regarding the
time-space dimension (Anderson, 2009, e.g. synchronic vs. diachronic), the conflicts in
views between language purism and language evolution, change, transmission and
reproduction then can be better understood instead of merely focusing on the static and
synchronic aspect of the different components in managing and constructing self and
identities. Readers are reminded again that language is one of the identity markers, instead
of the sole identity marker (see Chapter 3). Reporting on the Arapaho’s case, Anderson
(2009) observes how the young generations demonstrate a neotraditional ideology that
191
places their identity and authenticity in more recent and contemporary linguacultural
contexts that may not require Arapaho language. This is one of more instances that
exemplifies how young generations can still manage the relevance of their heritage
without a heritage language. Outside PS, Pillai and Khan (2011) interview MPC-speaking
group members of the larger diaspora within Malaysia who identify with Malaysian
English as their first language, and construct their ethnicity and identities by drawing
upon minimal use of MPC. Such a study continues to demonstrate the complexity in
conforming to politically and culturally constructed categories in the alignment of one’s
identities, with or without drawing upon one’s heritage language (see also Pillai, Soh &
Kajita, 2014). This also leads us to the question on language ownership: who can
legitimately speak about MPC and on behalf of the PS MPC-speaking group? This issue
is discussed in the next section.
7.3.2 Language Ownership
In Chapter 6 (Section 6.3.1 and 6.3.7), it is pointed out that the awareness on
heritage and ownership would have come from a combination of internal (e.g.
empowerment, self-determination) and external motivations (e.g. the community-
external factor), and knowledge-sharing between researchers and group members,
whether directly or indirectly, done intentionally or not so. The internal and external
motivations would have been triggered or swayed by the global and epistemological shifts
on one hand, and social, political and historical shifts on the other.
The historical division between the upper tens and those who identify with the PS
and MPC leaves a question open to the on-going ideological debates on language
ownership. Notice the question on Who can legitimately speak about MPC and on behalf
of the MPC-speaking group? is not about who can speak MPC as most PS MPC-speaking
group members welcome anyone to learn and speak MPC, and they feel proud when
192
outsiders are interested in their heritage language and more so when they want to learn
their heritage language. Group members usually also show a hint of pride when they
recalled speaking to Portuguese-speaking tourists and tourists could understand their
MPC speech. While more MPC materials and resources are welcomed, response towards
names associated with the MPC materials and resources can determine the recognition
and reception of MPC materials and resources. There is a general unspoken agreement
towards certain background and experience that legitimatise one’s speaking about MPC
and on behalf of the PS MPC-speaking group, as are also reported among other minority
groups (e.g. Daunhauer & Daunhauer, 1998; King, 2001; Sallabank, 2013). These
background and experience revolve around whether one is perceived to identify with the
PS community in ways acceptable to the community (e.g. having grown up in the PS or
outside PS, having spoken MPC as the first language or not) and experience in
representing the heritage and development of the people (e.g. having performed or
represented the people in public spheres outside PS and even overseas, having been in
contact with experts and authorities regarding heritage and community development).
The following excerpt demonstrates views towards whether language
revitalisation actors are deemed legitimate for the work undertaken. This excerpt also
uncovers one’s position in the ideological debates related to their heritage language,
particularly in legitimatising one language revitalisation actor’s efforts over another
actor’s. Language revitalisation actors who are not associated with the background and
experience that are deemed legitimate in speaking about MPC and on behalf of the people
by research participants are appreciated for their time and efforts in their language
revitalisation involvement, though comparably valued differently in contrast to
individuals deemed with legitimate background and experience. That the notion of there
is a time and space for MPC is also evident in this excerpt: “she has the time”, “I just, at
the moment, no time”. This temporal and psychological dimension is to be understood
193
against the interacting ideologies and identities, in addition to the minority groups’ socio-
economic system: whether there is a role for MPC or whether MPC is kept relevant
(Mufwene, 2003).
[E7.3, B24]
Ya. He speak very good Portuguese. Very good Portuguese. Local Portuguese…
OK. But then uh… for others uh… maybe not necessary… (recording was paused
before it resumed with the following) because she does a good work la… She has
the time take and all that la… Hmm… They have asked me so many times but I
just, at the moment, no time, no time… Because I also have the group at night
time and now the department is taking more of our time. Hmm… Too much.
Nowadays work is too hectic hmm…
With the awakening of self-determination and empowerment, research
participants have also showed a trend towards referring to people of their own (from the
PS, particularly, since this thesis focuses on PS MPC-speaking group members) when
citing from existing MPC materials, other than referring to experts who are accepted by
the PS community (see Chapter 6). Many research participants on the recipient side of
the language revitalisation express views on how they perceive they do not know well
enough to get involved in language revitalisation (e.g. in teaching or passing knowledge
to others) or how they perceive they are already speaking MPC at home so language
classes may not be necessary. Views like this go back to the question on whether the PS
MPC-speaking group members perceive that they are engaged or not in the language
revitalisation process and whether the individuals associated with the efforts are
legitimate according to the group members. In the following excerpt, the relationship is
again demonstrated between group members’ perceptions and reaction towards language
revitalisation efforts. It also demonstrates again that certain background and experience
are required in order to represent the people and heritage language legitimately as the
context of this excerpt has to be understood against to what extent one is perceived to
identify with the PS MPC-speaking group. To protect the identity of the individual
194
discussed, it suffices to say that the criteria of the certain background and experience are
not met in terms of perceived identification with MPC and residency in the PS (e.g. having
grown up in the PS and speaking MPC or not):
[E7.4, B8, R]
B8: He’s the one who’s bringing up all these things. But these people in this
village here, they don’t trust in him… So they… they just don’t want to give him
a chance. Ah…
R: Hmm… Why is it that he’s not trusted?
B8: I don’t know la… Because some people la… all think he is fighting for the…
fighting want to become a leader… but it’s not. Actually he is bringing up our
community you know… He’s showing the people out there how we are, how we
are this one. That’s why he… he is doing all this. Sometime we have uh… dinner
here but it’s all about Kristang. They record here, they do a tape then they sell the
tape. But it’s all in Kristang language, from the starting until the end. You can…
you can watch people speak… And that’s how we learn. But these people here,
they just don’t… they don’t like… they just putting him down. Ah… But he’s…
he never give up… ah… Most of the tourists also go down there and ask him for
stories.
Apart from background and experience, the conduct of work and ethics also come
into play as a determining factor, especially whether one has conducted work in ways
deemed respectful and acceptable by the people. Apart from perceptions towards
individuals behind MPC resources and materials, we also have to consider whether MPC
materials and resources are accessible and affordable, target audience of the materials and
resources (e.g. targeting the PS MPC-speaking group or the larger diaspora) to help
explain the gap between language revitalisation efforts and reactions towards efforts. The
spontaneous MPC language revitalisation so far has been perceived by research
participants as symbolically representing the heritage and the people. What underlies
these factors is the question of the extent of whether the PS MPC-speaking group
members have been considered and consulted. Research has shown how policies and
planning that do not consider the micro processes and minority groups’ perspectives and
only engage the groups in a minimal way have not bode well. The importance of prior
195
ideological clarification has also been recognised but challenges remain in achieving
consensus and reconciling the dynamics of perceptions and ideologies. Though one thing
that can be certain is if group members do not find policies and planning relevant to their
everyday life, the chances of sustaining these policies and planning are lower. Other than
factors discussed above that can increase or hinder the chances of MPC language
revitalisation efforts and outcomes reaching the PS MPC-speaking group members,
leadership has been touted as a determining factor. Recall also that in the PS, the regedor
or the headman is appointed by local authorities. In 2014, a new regedor and committee
were appointed to represent the people. The new appointment was received with good
response from the PS community. The need for leadership in the PS to advance has been
expressed for decades (e.g. Fernandis, 1995; Sta Maria, 1982). Prior to the new
appointment, there had always been talks about the need of new leadership as one key
factor that will change the fate of the people, as also evident among research participants.
The issue of naming a language is discussed here as part of language ownership
though the different aspects discussed here are interrelated, such as how language purism
views can lead to or be swayed by language ownership views. Underlying these
perceptions and views lie motivations (e.g. which identity to align with?) and ideologies
(e.g. which ideologies to draw upon?). Having no official consensus on the naming of
their heritage language, names referred to their heritage language by research participants
depend on who and in what language they are conversing. What was observed by Baxter
(1988) still holds as PS MPC-speaking group members tend to use Kristang to refer to
themselves among group members and switch to using Portuguese as there is a perception
that outsiders may not understand what Kristang means or even, it has been expressed
that outsiders may not be aware of their presence in the multilingual and multicultural
nation. These will have to be traced back to the subordinated social positioning and
ideologies that have been socialised and internalised among minority group members.
196
Kristang is the name that has been used to refer to the heritage language in study,
as research participants recalled how it has been so since childhood. In the recent years,
attention has been drawn to the naming of the heritage language, as observed by Baxter
(2012). The proposition against using Kristang is framed around how Kristang denotes
Christianity and other ethnic groups in Malaysia do not refer to themselves via their
religion. A related proposition for the naming then is Malacca Antique Portuguese,
though this view is presently limited to a limited segment of the group members. Similar
views are also found in Pillai (2013) though for ethical reasons, no direct links will be
matched between the views expressed in the present study and in the ELAR archieve.
Baxter (2012) has cautioned against perceiving the present form of the language in study
as a form that is directly transferred from the presumably earlier form of the language in
study spoken five hundred years ago.
The proposition for the exclusion of the Portuguese element in naming the group
members who speak the heritage language in study, as in Malacca Eurasians and Seranis,
in place of Malacca Portuguese or Malacca Portuguese Eurasians is set around how the
people who identify with a common heritage in study include not only Portuguese (see
Chapter 2). Such a proposition is directed mostly at people outside PS who form the larger
diaspora of a common heritage since PS is more historically associated with a Portuguese
presence. The public callouts to the people in social media in the present has employed a
more inclusive approach, placing various names side by side in the callouts such as “to
all Portuguese-Eurasians (Portuguese, Eurasian, Serani, Cristang, brackets are original)
diaspora” and “of Malaysian-Eurasian heritage, all Seranis, all Kristangs”.
The complex history and make-up of the MPC language and people who identify
with a MPC-speaking heritage have led to the present circumstances: that many group
members have only a vague idea of how their heritage language came about. E7.5 is one
of many similar replies to the question on the origin of MPC.
197
[E7.5, B22]
R: Mmm... OK. If uh... one day your daughter asks you about the origin of
Kristang language, would you be able to tell her anything about it?
B22: Origin of Kristang language huh... [And the history how it came about...] I
um... I can tell her but I”m not very sure.
R: Mmm... What would you tell her?
B22: If she were to ask me I would tell her that our great-great-great-grandfather
south of Portuguese and then they came here for war uh... [Mmm...] and then we
are mixed now.
R: What about the language? How it came about?
B22: I won’t be able to answer (that about) the language.
In relation to language ownership and language legitimacy, the notion of linguistic
insecurity and empowerment continue to be explored here. There is a perception
expressed fairly strongly among research participants on why the younger generation are
not speaking MPC, as demonstrated in the following excerpt:
[E7.6, A3, R]
R: Do you think the language is important to uhm... certain age groups or people
only?
A3: I think it’s important for everybody. Uh... all walks of life. Because even
uhm... a little this age you also have to... to speak to them in Kristang. So when
they grow up, it’s natural in them. [Yes] Because if they don’t learn when they
are young, when they grow up, they’ll... th... have a har... tough time learning.
R: So you think to be a member of the Kristang community [mmm…] one must

be able to speak [Yes] the Kristang [Yes, yes] language? OK.
A3: If not fluent also, you must know, you must understand the language. Mmm...
R: So, if people ask you to predict the future of the Kirstang language, [now] how
would you…
A3: Looking at the situation nowadays, I think it’s going to die off. If somebody
don’t do something, it’s going to die off. Because now with the Bahasa and
English some children don’t... d... I’m telling you, some children don’t even speak
the language. You speak to them in Kristang, they say, “Aunty, I don’t know what
you are saying.” Ah, so because they are so fluent in English nowadays and
Bahasa (Malay), they... they don’t uhm... practice the language. They don’t speak
the language at home.
198
The younger generation referred to by research participants point to both group
members from the larger diaspora outside PS and the younger generation in the PS. Group
members from the larger diaspora referred to include those who have migrated to big
cities within Malaysia or those who have migrated to, settled down or grown up in other
countries. Those in the PS referred to are said to be “shy” and “do not want to speak
MPC”. Following the encouraging overall cultural climate, research participants observe
how more people who have migrated or are from the migration generation in other cities
come back to the PS because they are perceived to want to get to know their heritage and
heritage language and “they know MPC is a nice language to learn”. As mentioned earlier
in this chapter, the interest flowing into the PS and towards MPC has been a boost to the
prestige and image of MPC. Despite this, research participants are divided between
claiming full ownership of MPC and rendering ownership and control to others,
particularly the elders who are seen as the legitimate faces and voices that represent MPC.
The notion of linguistic insecurity is also evident in how many from the younger
generations shied away when approached for a MPC-speaking recording for a
documentation project (Pillai, 2013).
7.3.3 Literacy and Post-colonial Planning
This section discusses how the interaction between the accumulating ideologies,
particularly colonial ideologies, nation-state ideologies and self-determination ideologies
can be at play in matters related to literacy and nation-state planning. Tensions in
ideologies underlie research participants’ reference to a Portuguese Eurasian heritage, to
the presence of Portugal and European Portuguese and in some cases, Brazilian
Portuguese and representing the locality of MPC on related matters.
Having been an oral language learned and socialised informally (Chapter 2 & 6),
MPC is still perceived to be one such language by many in the PS although it is
199
increasingly written down by group members in individual, ununiformed ways, mostly
following what one perceives the words to sound like, unless one attends MPC language
classes which prescribes a spelling form. Having attended MPC language classes, it was
observed that a self-determined spelling form was used in the language classes targeted
at children. The colonial and western ideologies (Dorian, 1998) impose that an oral
language without a written form would be ranked low. It follows that similar to many
other minority groups, the MPC-speaking group members see literacy as a significant
goal in language revitalisation.
In reality, research has shown that languages with a writing system or with high
prestige can still face endangerment and that a focus on achieving literacy is in effect
preserving rather than revitalising a language (Mufwene, 2003). Not all parties in the
language revitalisation are informed on the distinction between preserving and
revitalising a language though this thesis acknowledges that preserving a language may
lead to opportunities of revitalising it. Research participants who are involved in the
bottom-up language revitalisation efforts would have given more thoughts to topics on
spelling conventions and teaching and reference materials. Those involved in the bottom-
up language revitalisation efforts are developing MPC reference materials of their own,
for example, when designing MPC language lessons or when compiling MPC materials
such as in the language speaking group. Most of the existing MPC materials seem to cater
for a wider diaspora of the Eurasian community and only one material from the existing
MPC materials (Baxter & De Silva, 2004) is referred to other than references and
materials inherited by A5 from her late father and materials compiled by non-PS-MPC-
speakers and non-PS-community-members such as European Portuguese dictionaries.
The views on which spelling convention to use cannot be isolated from identity
alignment. Generally, a preference was expressed towards a spelling convention that
reflects a phonemic spelling system among research participant. In the following
200
excerpts, multiple alignment is manifested in the spelling conventions one chooses to
align with:
i. the standard European Portuguese spelling when necessary (E7.7, multiple
alignment is present because of the occasional alignment with European
Portuguese while favouring a more localised spelling form),
ii. a more phonemic and sometimes seemingly Malay-influenced spelling
convention as in the MPC dictionary (E7.8),
iii. a self-determined spelling convention based on earlier wordlists (E7.9),
iv. a possible spelling convention that can better capture the locality of the
language that is yet to be created (E7.10).
[E7.7, A1]
Ok, um… the spelling for… personally for me, I feel that I will fall back to Patrick
De Silva’s book, his dictionary. Uh… his dictionary for me, I feel is more uh…
accurate, in terms of how to spell the word. But there is also sometimes uh… some
in… in… in… one or two feel that, you know, some of the spelling is uhm… not
so correct. And… and they want to spell maybe a bit differently and follow more
of the Portuguese uhm… spelling system. Because uhm… I don’t know how to
say… put this but uhm… because the Portuguese uh… spelling is very difficult
to really uhm… how should I say, very difficult to make it accurate because they
have conversations up and down and the sound is different, you see. But ours is
basically based on the local Malay uh… spelling and system, huh. And… ba…
and basically how it sounds. OK? How it sounds. So the word falah (MPC,
‘speak’) f_a_l_a_h (spells the word out), you see? So, it will more or less sound
like the uh… Malay spelling system and phonetics… So sometimes we need to…
to… to get a clearer uh… understanding of a particular word, we refer to our
English dictionary. And then we have a Portuguese-English dictionary uh…
English-English-Bahasa dictionary, a Kristang Dictionary, we also have some
(xxx) materials... we, we compare notes…
[E7.8, A5]
Alan Baxter said that uh... we should try to use the... Bahasa Malaysia
orthography. So, simply using the Bahasa orthography, I think I have it in this
one. Uh... which is very simple, very clear. And somebody wrote to me and said,
“Hey, I got your dictionary but it’s so difficult for me to follow how to go about
using your spelling.” Now, very simply, we don’t want any highfalutin kind of
thing. Just c represents the sound ch (/tʃ/) And in... in Ma... Malay too. So for
instance, chair in English or children, same value in Bahasa (Malay) is cendawan
(Malay, ‘mushroom’, /tʃəndawan/) or cuci (Malay, ‘wash’, /tʃutʃi/). You... you
201
see, we’re... we’re... we’re following the Malay system already. Then sh sound
(/ʃ/) in English. As in shoes and shop. It is in the same value as sh sound (/ʃ/) in
Bahasa, which is syarikat (Malay, ‘company’) or syabas (Malay, ‘well done’).
[E7.9, A6]
The spelling… is so far different like Alan Baxter spells it as k_u_n_g (spells the
word out) kung, we say kum (MPC, and) but my father’s one is k_u_m (spells the
word out) which is easier to read. When I wrote on the board k_u_n_g (spells the
word out) automatically the children said kung… k_u_n_g (spells the word out)
is kung because Bahasa Malaysia the sound… When I put k_u_m (spells the word
out) they say kum. So it’s… it’s easier for them to read, you see… so that’s why
I”m using this, my father’s spelling… What I know is (my father) has done
research himself. You see… and f… Ah… whom I do not know. But when I
have… I used this with children and I see that it’s very, very effective and they
could read. So if children can read, what’s more adults? You see… even adults
could read then.
[E7.10, A7]
We are still trying to formulate the correct form of writing the language. Because
the spelling that has been put forward by some authors are... well I would not say
they are wrong but um... we... we would uh... beg to differ at certain areas. For
example, certain fundamentals have to be retained although we agree that it should
be felt for... uh... spelt phonetically and not the way that it’s... standard Portuguese
is being... being spelt. So, we are now going to work in those areas, ah... know?
Where we have to eventually uh... have a standard form of written Portuguese.
But I do not discourage others from buying these books written by other authors...
because they have done a lot of work. They put a lot of efforts in their work and
we have to give them due respect, give credit for their work. Because currently
there is no um... material except theirs, so even though we disagree with their
(xxx) or the way they wrote, I would still encourage others to buy those books
because theirs the books that are presently available.
A phonemic spelling convention can also be seen in the souvenir programme book
of Festa San Pedro 2013 (‘Festival San Pedro 2013’) distributed in the PS, extracting
MPC phrases from the Festa San Pedro 1998 souvenir programme book:
202
Table 7.1: Some MPC phrases from Festa San Pedro 2013 souvenir programme
book
English Portuguese (original in the book)

Good morning Sir Bong pamiang Senhor
Good day Sir Bong dia Senhor
Good evening Sir Bong atadi Senhor
Good night Sir Bong anoti Senhor
Are you married? Bos ja kazar?
I am married Yo ja kazar
How many children you have Kanto familia bos teng?
I have 3 boys and 4 girls Yo teng tres filo kuarto fila
Today is the feast of Saint Peter Ozi San Pedro
The feast falls on what day Isti festa kai no kal dia?
On 29th June each year Na binti novi Jun kada ano
Some research participants also observe that there have been some propositions
towards a more pro-European Portuguese spelling convention within PS. This can be
related to what Baxter (2012) comments as the possible effects of Portuguese language
teaching personnel sent to PS, Malacca. Survey with research participants in study shows
that there is no uniformed perception on what language was taught in language classes
organised by the Korsang Portuguese foundation. As such, individuals could draw upon
the multiple ideologies and identities to align with when reconstructing experiences of
attending these language classes. However, a look at the poster for Portuguese language
classes organised by the Korsang Foundation is telling about the language that is taught
and the positioning of the instructor or foundation or both:
203
Comments on the link between MPC and European Portuguese have uncovered
interesting positions among group members, generally maintaining the link with Portugal
but some have proposed to focus on capturing or demonstrating the locality and
uniqueness of MPC. Most group members show a good impression towards the foreign
204
language class conductors or the classes conducted by them. However, group members
who are language revitalisation actors are mostly more explicit in demonstrating a
preference for capturing the locality and uniqueness of MPC. In the following excerpt,
there is a viewpoint on how teaching European Portuguese is not as relevant to the PS
MPC-speaking group:
[E7.11, A3]
Because uh... you see, when they first had the Portuguese class, conducted by
AS16, uh... there were about 200 children who registered. [Ooh!] Uh… but as…
[That’s a lot.] Uh… yes, that’s a lot. But as uh... time went by, uh... they ended up
with only a few. [Mmm... OK.] That’s not good. [But in] Maybe... maybe...
maybe... maybe, ah… I... I... I”m not say it is, ah? I”m saying maybe it’s because
of the language, because they are teaching Portuguese. Portuguese we don’t apply
in our... our daily use. So I think maybe some parents found out that it’s... you
know, it doesn’t make sense, maybe. I don’t know.
On the part of other MPC-speaking group members, there is a need to consider
how group members do not find orthographic variation as used in texting and social media
problematic, which demonstrates creativity on language users as agents. Most research
participants expressed that they could understand what others were saying in MPC in
social media although others spelled words according to how they perceived the words to
sound like. At the time when this thesis was written, the has been a collaboration between
representatives from the PS MPC-speaking group, some of which are research
participants of this research, and linguists from the University of Malaya on producing
teaching materials in MPC; prior to that, a CD of MPC prayers and hymns was released.
In preparing for the CD of MPC prayers and hymns, aspects of MPC were discussed and
MPC was contrasted to Portuguese spelling conventions (Pillai, personal
communication).
Adding to the tensions is the need to find ways for the MPC-speaking group
members to represent themselves in a post-independent multicultural nation, as observed
by Sarkissian (1997, 2000, 2005). In national planning, though some of their rights are
205
included in the constitution and some promised in the past, the PS MPC-speaking group
continues to remain underrepresented or marginalised and overlooked in many ways,
especially in their decades-long campaign towards their land rights. As introduced in
Chapter 2, the more concentrated MPC use in PS has been accredited as one of the key
factors of MPC’s vitality (Baxter, 2005, 2012). In the present, PS is no longer as isolated
as before following the establishments of hotel and tertiary education institute, which
were said to possibly benefit the PS residents by increasing their job opportunities and
education level when the construction of these establishments faced objections from the
PS residents. At the time of research, campaign was still underway to demand authorities
to look into the latest addition to the PS coastline development which will impact on the
PS in terms of the fishermen’s livelihood and possible pollution (Cheah, 2015; Kumar,
2015; Lee, 2015; Singh, 2015; The Malay Mail Online, 2015). The PS residents have
experienced several similar experiences in not being consulted prior to constructions
impinging around or on the PS area. The following excerpt makes a strong case for how
authorities can appear to be oblivious to the group’s livelihood and heritage preservation.
As stated in Chapter 2, in Malaysia, where it is mandatory to identify one’s race from
birth according to rigid categories, people who identify with the common heritage in study
are placed under the category of a broad umbrella term, Others. One’s right to claim an
ethnic, cultural and even geographical heritage is negated under such circumstances.
[E7.12, A8]
Now if you say that you are a Portuguese, “I’m a Portuguese.” Can you speak
Portuguese? You can’t. Eh… What sort of Portuguese you are. That’s why by and
by, the government also but they don’t bother. You don’t keep your culture to
them is nothing, right? So there’s no more kaum (Malay, ‘ethnic group’)
Portuguese. There only will be orang Cina, Melayu, orang India dan orang Sikh
(Malay, ‘Chinese, Malays, Indians and Sikhs, orang denoting ‘people’). Now,
Sikh is coming up because they are promoting their culture but actually there’s
one identity only as an Indian. OK… The Sikh also they come from India. So now
as a kaum Portuguese, akan datang dihapuskan dengan sebab tidak mempunyai
budaya sendiri (Malay, ‘the Portuguese ethnic group might be removed based on
the reason they do not have their own culture’).
206
The presence of other ethnic groups’ rights as stated in the constitution does not
translate into actions easily, including language rights. In practice, although language
rights are established in the constitution, except for vernacular schools, school laws
usually prohibit the use of mother tongue languages outside mother tongue lesson hours,
allowing only Malay and English. Research participants who were of schooling age also
expressed that they would not speak MPC in schools though it could be used as a secret
language.
Prior to colonial periods, reciprocal multilingualism was valued (Chapter 2). The
colonial ideologies have also undergone restructuring following different colonial
powers. The restructuring in hierarchies have to be understood against how a once-most-
frequented-port became a state among other states that make up the new nation. The
restructuring impacted on and affected hierarchies in everyday life, including linguistic,
social, spiritual or religious and economic. The dynamics and openness of pre-colonial,
reciprocal multilingualism went through restructuring through the different colonial
periods before undergoing further restructuring in the new nation-state planning; the
restructuring, similar to the fluidity of identities and concepts, is negotiated and adjusted
on-the-ground. The colonial ideologies of literacy as an important characteristic of real
language in contrast to an oral language without a written form prior to language
documentation and the post-colonial ideologies that are associated with nation-planning
will always be in presence. Isolation that has helped sustain MPC which is also
simultaneously a form of marginalisation of the PS community, are the circumstances of
the hierarchical multilingualism restructuring following historical power takeovers of
Malacca, especially after independence. The historical records show the fading of MPC
as lingua franca following the reduction in the MPC-speaking community after the
Portuguese lost power over Malacca.
207
To express their cultural identity, MPC-speaking group members have also
undergone restructuring in terms of the linguistic hierarchy. Before independence, MPC
held a lower status due to its associations with a lower socio-economic status. After
independence, beginning in the 1980s, there have been attempts to establish the stance of
the MPC-speaking group members regarding their heritage. Pillai and Khan (2011) also
provide evidences on the negative associations MPC used to be associated with and the
past negative perceptions towards the PS which was to be shunned. MPC is presently
observed to enjoy a new found prestige and interest with more concerted efforts within
and flowing into the PS to celebrate and promote their heritage (e.g. the 500 years
celebration in 2011, cultural dance troupes, music bands).
The hierarchical multilingualism brought about by British colonisation has shaped
the linguistic hierarchy and the ideologies on how “real” languages whose criteria are not
met by contact languages without literacy and are associated with being the less version
of prestigious colonial languages. Present prejudices towards MPC are found to be similar
to the Honiara context (Jourdan & Angeli, 2014) and Vanuatu context (Crowley, 2000),
in which minority languages in study are perceived to be “inadequate” and “backward”
due to having no literacy and being “simple” for having “no grammar” and no words for
the modern usage. For those few who have access to MPC academic works or exposure
to language-related discussions such as Baxter and De Silva (2004) and involved, their
perceptions towards MPC are different as they acknowledge that their heritage language
is a unique language of its own. The colonial ideologies in which vernaculars were not
considered to be adequate for teaching or learning in schools are also found in the PS.
Many from the PS have not heard about the possibility of teaching and learning MPC in
schools and were surprised: “I don’t know schools allow”. Despite the link between
language and identity as perceived, the sense of obligation to learn MPC does not match
comparably as it is the language to be learned when the children “have the time”.
208
Post-colonial societies undergo restructuring to balance and resist the former
colonial influences. However, a colonial language remains relevant especially when the
colonial language is English, the global or international language. Jourdan and Angeli
observe the awareness of the value of English as the language with linguistic and social
capital on a global market in the Honiara context. Similarly, English in Malaysia has
remained the language of social advancement. The sociolinguistic setting of Malaysian
English began to develop during the British colonisation from the late eighteenth century
until the mid-twentieth centuries (Lowenberg, 1993). Based on the ability to read and
write a letter, the census of 1921 shows that 61,862 out of the total population of the
towns which is 743,126 were able to speak English from the fifteen towns in the Straits
Settlements and Federated Malay states (here from Lee & Tan, 2000). Jourdan and
Angeli note how the superiority of English is now generally attributed to its greater
instrumental value at the global level in terms of university education and job
opportunities among Pijin speakers, rather than to its intrinsic qualities or to the
prestigious status of its speakers. A similar trend is observed in the PS, seeing how
English mastery has helped secure jobs in various industries that require English speaking
such as in the hospitality and service line. The linguistic currency of English is evident,
either implied or directly uttered by research participants from different generation
groups.
7.3.4 Language Acquisition and Transmission and Contemporary Trends
Concepts and implications discussed above have impacts on choices in language
acquisition and transmission, and language revitalisation (see Section 7.3). MPC was
perceived by many research participants to have its time and place. In contrast is how
MPC was very often recalled in conversations to be a “natural” choice of language for
those who actively speak MPC and grew up speaking MPC, especially a hint of nostalgia
209
always prevailed when recalling how MPC used to be spoken and heard everywhere in
the PS. Such views can be understood against the relevance of the role of a heritage
language in the present which determines its vitality and development (Dorian, 1998;
Mufwene, 2003). In light of this view, MPC, which used to hold a significant role in the
livelihood of the PS fishermen, becomes a heritage language with its functions revolving
around its use in the present communities of practice. This is especially so when the
language has always been learned in informal settings and still an oral language to most
of its PS group members though there are evidences that MPC is unofficially gaining a
literacy status among group members involved in language revitalisation and also other
group members on social media platform and in digital communication. Not restricted to
only home and neighbourhood domains, MPC has come to be used in more contemporary
domains, such as social media and contemporary cultural performance. MPC continues
to serve its purpose as linguistic resources for the present communities of practice, such
as when attending funerals or church, identity alignment (e.g. drawing upon this heritage
in expressing a part of social identities) and aesthetic appreciation.
Disconnect in the view between language use and language transmission can also
be understood by considering what Anderson (2009: 75-76) contends: that ideologues are
constrained by the limits of space-time and social space-time has not been
revernacularised. The coping strategies of managing the relevance of MPC, particularly
of taking things into own hands (e.g. more explicit self-differentiation, self-determination,
drawing upon temporal and spatial experiences to align with target identities and self-
differentiation), in the case of MPC have involved reclaiming heritage language in ways
and in the space-time more locally to group members.
A contemporary trend of linguistic empowerment is on rise. Decades of calls for
MPC-speaking group members to connect with their heritage and establish their stance,
sporadic language efforts and interest from outside the PS since the eighties have been
210
brewing the linguistic empowerment that is in response to being underrepresented or
represented inadequately in group members’ opinion. As discussed in the previous
chapters, the global ideological and epistemological shift towards recognising the rights
and self-determination of minority groups are encouraging for the overall cultural climate
of linguistic empowerment. MPC serves its symbolic function as the cultural and ethnic
marker while being used in the present communities of practice (e.g. family,
neighbourhood, funerals, church, social media). For the well-being and sustaining of the
community, PS group members are establishing or reclaiming their rights or ownerships:
one major establishment is towards the land that has been home to PS community since
1930 that is being encroached by development. Some major points in socio-political
events of the group members include the rights to invest in certain national trust schemes
which are usually restricted to people of other ethnic groups except for the Malays and
indigenous and the sea reclamation project that would have led to a community centre for
the PS community though the promise was not delivered.
Another contemporary trend also concerns multilingualism which has been
discussed before. However, the contemporary heritage speakers are redefining what it
means to be heritage speakers while reinforcing multilingualism as members of a larger
society. MPC speakers are reinforcing the values of MPC via what they have been
associated with: music, culture and tourism, be it within or outside PS. It is thus relevant
to also draw on what happens outside the PS. The notion of being part of the MPC-
speaking group, equipped with the internet and technology, is no longer confined to being
a certain group in a specific location or time-space. The reciprocal multilingualism from
the precolonial period ingrained in the contemporary society at large welcomes and
encourages different cultural identities though this does not reflect the response to other
establishments and rights related to minority groups. Recall how research participants
expressed that anyone could learn MPC and there is a division on views regarding
211
whether MPC is a prerequisite to be one of the PS MPC-speaking group members
(Chapter 6). The heritage speakers have found and given new meanings to being heritage
MPC speakers as the new meanings are associated with imagined communities of
practice, the lines become less clear for what are used to define a typical PS MPC-
speaking community. One instance is how having grown up in or identifying with PS or
not is less relevant on social platforms when people of Portuguese ancestry share about
music, culture and tourism information while embracing multilingualism and the cultural
freedom attached. Linguistic resources are then used to define and express these new
meanings. In turn, the relevance of the heritage language is managed when one aligns
with it or to a lesser degree in construction of identities and ideologies.
The contemporary trends in MPC use are important especially in understanding
views on language acquisition and language transmission. In the present communities of
practice, it is observed that while MPC may be written phonemically in ununiformed
ways, the informal setting provided in social media and digital communication matches
how MPC has always been acquired and transmitted. It is hard to access and predict, if
no further language revitalisation and language planning are in place, whether to what
extent MPC can continue to be used actively in social media and digital communication.
Based on the evidences in this research and in literature, given the multilingual context
and the active use of MPC remains more so among certain age groups or families,
language change is inevitable and language is always evolving, be it for internal or
external factors (e.g. Mufwene, 2001, 2013). The form and shape MPC has taken and will
take among younger generation speakers and in contemporary communities of practice
will likely to have to be embraced, with or without intervention. Group members, in any
further language revitalisation efforts, will have to make decision on how to reconcile
what Dorian (1994) discusses as the tensions between purism and compromise.
212
To research participants, there are three parties that are responsible for MPC
language teaching: the elders (see discussion on language purism and language
ownership), the leaders (see discussion on language ownership), and parents. Parents
were often cited as to why children in the PS did not attend the available MPC language
classes. The following excerpt is one such demonstration. In the excerpt, the research
participant is one who grew up in the PS and remains a PS resident with young children
who were not among those who had attended the language classes. The reason given as
to why the language classes were not attended was how contacts with the elders were
believed to be sufficient for MPC language acquisition:
[E7.13, B24]
There has been I think two, three efforts… [two, three efforts] ah… ya... But how
much the interest from the settlement children, I do not know. Because I think
they have no encouragement from the family. To me is that, you see… uh…
actually if they only spoke the language at home or put 20% to 30% on the
language in Portuguese, speak the language 20%, 30% at home, we won’t have to
worry. Ah… We won’t have to worry la… Because even classes that uh… have
been uh… actions that have been taken to have classes but I think the attendance
is very poor… very poor. Because no encouragement from the families.
The same excerpt also demonstrates what has been observed in field trips and
among other research participants: that there are many group members who are aware
that language use at home is important for language transmission. This is in contrast to
what Dauenhauer and Dauenhauer (1998) have observed where language speakers may
not see the link between language use and language transmission though to what extent
the connection between language use and transmission is understood and conceptualised
is beyond the scope of this research. Another observation by Dauenhauer and
Dauenhauer, however, holds in this research in how culture is seen as something that can
be put on and off, as evident in the coping strategies of managing MPC relevance, such
as self-differentiating or self-accommodating or preferring ambiguity to align or not align
with the MPC-speaking heritage or to take control or render control to others (Chapter 6).
213
It follows that in language revitalisation, group members will be facing a decision to
make: the extent of aligning with a MPC-speaking heritage and of control towards MPC
and heritage. Topics relevant to the discussion of MPC language revitalisation are
presented in the rest of this chapter.
7.4 MPC Language Revitalisation
Although this thesis explores and focuses on the on-the-ground or bottom-up
MPC language revitalisation process, the social structure and development, especially
possible top-down ideologies as drawn on throughout the thesis, are inseparable from the
ecology and discussion of MPC language revitalisation. Some instances from the on-the-
ground processes demonstrate the relationship between on-the-ground processes and top-
down processes are:
● the wish for better leadership in the PS cannot be isolated from the interaction
between the PS and the local authorities as even though PS has a committee led by a
headman (the regedor), another committee presumably acting as the bridge between PS
and the local authorities is appointed by local authorities to attend to their welfare matters
● the on-going campaigning for land rights and against coastline development that
could impact on the PS livelihood and well-being, including their heritage language which
has been spoken actively in the settlement with a concentrated population
● the wish for a community centre has been long expressed and the PS
community’s hopes were raised at one point when there were speculations that it might
be built on a piece of reclaimed land which later was built a hotel before being bought
over by a learning institute. Research participants still hope that a community centre will
be built for their community which is touted as a place in which anyone could go and
interact in MPC.
214
The discussion so far has exemplified the meanings, considerations, tensions and
conflicts in bottom-up MPC language revitalisation. The discussion shows the relevance
of considering the role of MPC in the present socio-economic systems and of influencing
and bridging behaviours and the psychological dimension (e.g. ideologies and identities
alignment and construction), which is one important argument throughout this thesis.
Another argument stems from how socio-historical and socio-political background has to
be considered when discussing language endangerment and language revitalisation. A
third argument lies in what choices to make and what identities to align with in language
revitalisation when drawing from a range of ideologies and self-identifications in keeping
one’s heritage language relevant as a part of social life (i.e. aligning with a MPC-speaking
heritage) while maintaining other parts of social life and identifications (eg. identifying
with being and representing a Malaysian or Malaccan). Reconnecting with a MPC-
speaking heritage has been making a comeback through cultural activities and language
revitalisation, as well as campaigning in defence of land rights and self-determination.
This section relates findings thus far to language revitalisation which can be seen
as a form of manifestation of language planning though as pointed out earlier, components
and impacts of language revitalisation can go beyond language planning and extend to
non-language areas such as overall group well-being and minority rights. A detailed
proposal for MPC language revitalisation is beyond the scope of this research. The
outcome of this research can be aligned with ideological clarification via the experiences
and expressivity of the people in study. As such, this section focuses on what can be
drawn from this research, while taking further steps and building on previous
recommendations and literature. Based on research since the 1980s, Baxter (2012) lists
down recommendations for MPC language revitalisation: a community-based body
devoted to language preservation, community involvement, sustainability (e.g. being
critical and persistent, engaging new members), associated professional consultants (e.g.
215
outsider linguists), financial base and school support. These recommendations are a
match to what research participants of this research have named when discussing about
language revitalisation efforts that they would like to organise or see happen. Seeing there
has not been any formal work on MPC language revitalisation other than
recommendations, the following sections attempt to begin conversations on
considerations and ideological clarifications in the planning and conduct of MPC
language revitalisation while drawing on findings of this research. It can be gathered that
to address the gaps between language revitalisation efforts and reactions towards efforts
in practice, there will be a need to search for ways to act as bridge between efforts and
reaction. The rest of this chapter attempts to consider two questions:
i. How can the substantive model of managing MPC relevance be drawn upon
in further language revitalisation efforts?
ii. How can language revitalisation efforts engage and reach out to the
recipients?
This thesis, thus far, has demonstrated that language revitalisation actors manage
the relevance of their heritage language in a more explicit and self-differentiating way,
setting them apart from other group members who may manage more implicitly and
render control and ownership to others, as discussed in the continuum of coping strategies
in Chapter 6 (Major component 2 in Figure 6.7). The division between the two categories
of group members must be seen as a continuum. In planning MPC language revitalisation,
then, one can draw upon the four major components of the substantive model to better
approach and understand the experiences and conceptualisations in the sub-processes of
the MPC language revitalisation process cycle. As demonstrated in the MPC language
revitalisation process cycle (Major component 1 in Figure 6.7) in Chapter 6 and discussed
earlier in this chapter, MPC language revitalisation actors are motivated to reclaim their
216
heritage language by a range of and a combination of internal and external factors (e.g.
reconnecting with heritage) and their psychological dimension, discourses and actions set
them apart from other group members. As shared by language revitalisation actors, the
source of motivation, inspiration and encouragement can come in two directions:
community-internal or community-external. These language revitalisation actors are
individuals who have been in touch with linguists and researchers and who have been
exposed to other minority groups’ experiences.
If one contends that in language revitalisation efforts, ideologies and behaviours
are assumed to be able to be influenced and directed towards certain alignment (see
Chapter 3), it can be reasoned that when more MPC-speaking group members experience
what the language revitalisation actors have experienced to take things into their own
hands, there is a chance for more group members to join them and reclaim their heritage
language. This suggests more conversations with more group members are necessary.
While having more conversations in forms and mediums possible and appropriate to the
group members by referring to what the language revitalisation actors have experienced
is important, it is equally important to consider seriously what the people would like to
do with and see happen to their heritage language. The approach in language development
is relevant here as it is suitable for on-the-ground language revitalisation though other
relevant frameworks are to be drawn from whenever necessary. Language development
is defined by Quakenbush (2007: 45) as the “advancement of language resources and
competencies so that a community can effectively use its language(s) for the varied
purposes it requires and desires”. One closely linked consideration is what the group
members are capable of doing (Bowern, 2011; Quakenbush, 2007) and can be made
capable of doing (the literature is growing on how collaborative work can be done with
group members for specific trainings e.g. Black & Black, 2012).
217
Motivation has been demonstrated as a determining factor in social processes
throughout this thesis. The motivations of initiating or participating in MPC language
revitalisation efforts can be understood from two viewpoints, inward- and outward-
looking motivations which overlap and interrelate, instead of being completely exclusive
of each other. The inward-looking motivations stem from among others, fear, worries,
nostalgia and pride, as the speakers are looking for networks to reconnect with MPC, their
heritage and their people such as the language speaking group and social media groups,
longing for new communities of practice (Wendel & Heinrich, 2012). As demonstrated
in Chapter 6, the outward-looking motivations are driven by reaction or resistance
towards social forces in the language ecology. There are two questions to consider here.
The first one concerns who should provide motivations for language revitalisation while
the second question concerns what motivations are closer to the group members’ heart
though it is recognised that motivations can be interrelated.
In language development studies (Premsrirat & Malone, 2003; Quakenbush,
2007), leaders can be seen as motivation providers. Such a view is shared by research
participants of this study, in that they point to leaders, elders and parents as responsible
for language acquisition and transmission. In language endangerment, language
revitalisation and language planning and policy studies, we have seen how different age
groups can play a part in the role of policy-making or at least policy-influencing, whether
one is an elder, a parent, a teenager or a child (e.g. Fishman, 1991; Pillai, Soh & Kajita,
2014; Ruby, 2012; Schwartz, 2008; Spolsky, 2004).
Although the elders will always be looked upon as the faces of a heritage
language, the voice of the group members has become audible through the voice of the
middle-age groups in the case of MPC. The MPC language revitalisation actors, equipped
with individual knowledge and experience, have stepped forward to reclaim their heritage
language. Many young adults are presently working in places far from the PS, making
218
their representation in the case in study less visible. However, it may also be reasoned
that the cultural climate through which the present young adults grew up with might not
have been as encouraging in comparison to the time of research. Their lack of
representation in matters related to their heritage and community development may then
be understood as a looser link to being the legitimate owners of MPC and of their heritage
and community, as can be gathered from the socio-historical and political development
of the people and their heritage language, as discussed in Chapter 2 and 6 (Major
component 4, Figure 6.7). At the present, it appears that there are children of certain
families in which constant access to MPC is available and those who have the experiences
in language classes and cultural troupes will likely to inherit the roles to continue to
reclaim their heritage language in the future. Though, as shared by research participants,
once some children enter teenage years and later when they enter the working world,
things may change. The present motivations to keep MPC relevant as part of their heritage
language are complementing each other by a number of variables: the available
communities of practice (thus access to MPC), the overall cultural climate boosting
multilingualism and interest in MPC and social and community development which can
unite group members and establish links to MPC (e.g. campaigning for land matters).
In the present, we are seeing a bit more of concerted efforts in the PS to raise
awareness and also garner possible funding, as shown in the efforts to produce CDS for
prayers and hymns in MPC. MPC teaching materials which are collaboration between
representatives from the PS MPC-speaking group members and a team from University
of Malaya are presently in progress (University of Malaya Community Engagement Grant
2015, CE2015/26). Such interest in MPC from outside PS, especially coming from a
tertiary education institute, add to the motivations to revitalise MPC (see also community-
external motivations in Chapter 6). To answer the question of who should provide
motivations for MPC language revitalisation, though everyone has his or her role to play,
219
it is clear that to reconcile group members’ goals, needs and tensions, a bridge is needed
to allow communication to happen. That bridge can be local leaders or a body to overlook
matters related to MPC language revitalisation though unofficially, such a body is in
presence under a local association. This academy of arts and culture saw through the
language classes in 2011-2012 which eventually closed due to a dwindling number of
students. Comments were also given by research participants against the nature and
conduct of language classes, which will be discussed below. As such, this bridge will
have a lot of work to do. Although having a body to overlook matters related to language
revitalisation does not guarantee the commitment to efforts and language vitality, such a
body can in effect increase awareness of language vitality and be a platform for like-
minded people to join efforts.
The motivations of speaking, learning and revitalising MPC revolve around how
group members attempt to connect with their MPC-speaking heritage, self and group in
social and self representation and identification (Chapter 6). While the symbolic function
or use of MPC as an ethnic and cultural marker has been discussed and sometimes taken
as a given, it is also important to consider the communicative and affective functions of
language and the socio-psychological dimension. Language learning and speaking are not
solely done for pragmatic and instrumental purposes, nor are they solely motivated by
socio-political factors. Humans speak languages for communicative and affective
purposes and essentially, to connect with other human beings. The relevance of the notion
of communities of practice in the present (Wendel & Heinrich, 2012, in contrast to
domains used extensively in literature) is discussed in Chapter 3 and can further be
demonstrated in how research participants, when answering survey questions on the
typical domains of MPC use, provided answers that often do not match the typical
domains of language use. They could have learned MPC from a certain elder in the PS
while they speak little MPC at home or they have acquired MPC because their daily life
220
is spent with a family with constant access to MPC though they are not related to the
family by blood ties. What can be gathered from their sharing is how MPC-speaking is
essentially spoken as it is on the ground. This is to say it is not restricted to the typical
domains due to the language contact situation in which MPC developed and continues to
develop. To answer the question on what motivations are closer to the group members’
heart, it will essentially take a combination of reconnecting with people (e.g. communities
of practice, the PS community, the people looked up to), self-managing and reconnecting
with heritage in aligning with a MPC-speaking heritage while maintaining other social
and self- identification and representation in social life. Viewpoints on commitment, as
discussed by Garrett, Coupland and Williams (2003, also discussed in Chapter 3), remind
us that the complexity of domains can determine the relationship between stated attitudes
and behaviours and have to be taken into consideration in considering the motivations of
learning and revitalising MPC. In the present case, based on self-reporting among
participants and observation among other group members, language classes which require
a long-term commitment fare less than those requiring shorter-term commitment and
short-term adjustment such as participation in festivals and ceremonies.
The present bottom-up MPC language revitalisation are, if placed on a continuum,
with two orientations on each end. One orientation is inclined towards formal,
institutional setting while the other one tends to be casual and informal. The present
bottom-up MPC language revitalisation efforts can also be approached by another two
orientations, again, on a continuum: PS community-based or reaching out to a wider
diaspora. This study adds to the research which observe that works that do not consider a
group’s language goals naturally do not reach out to group members significantly.
Granted, one needs to consider a range of factors, including perceptions towards
individuals associated with language revitalisation efforts, access to language
revitalisation efforts and outcomes. Drawing on the close-to-heart matters and
221
peoplehood (Major component 3 in Figure 6.7), the local way-of-life needs to be
considered for considerations on the practicality and approach of language revitalisation
efforts. The following example can demonstrate the need to consider as such. Though
research participants expressed that they would like to see more MPC resources created
and reacted positively to the ideas of reading MPC books, the practicality and approach
of books will have to considered, as more group members still see MPC as an oral
language. This by no means dictates that book reading is of little importance among group
members but this has more to do with the local way-of-life. If more books and other
resources are being created, the questions to be considered include, among others, Are
more resources created in the form that can be relevant to group members? How can
book-reading be designed in a way to engage group members?
To questions above, perhaps we can, again, draw from language development
studies to take cue on how language efforts can be approached and designed to suit
purposes as the group requires and desires (Quakenbush, 2007). A community centre that
has been talked about for a long time, funds which are for education purposes and not
restricted to language teaching, language classes and classes that equip one with skills
(e.g. sewing, cooking) but conducted in mostly MPC to teach MPC received more votes
when research participants were asked to imagine what they would like to do for their
heritage language if there was sufficient funding. Apart from the forms of efforts, the
nature and approach of efforts are equally important. Research participants have shared
how they enjoyed certain language classes over other efforts because those are deemed
more fun and enjoyable or there were peers or companies that they could click with. What
is interesting among those who expressed is how some research participants agree with a
more institutional approach while there are also those, though they are not language
revitalisation actors, have given the nature of MPC more thoughts than others. The
following excerpt was taken from a conversation with an elder group member. This
222
excerpt demonstrates what MPC-speaking is to group members and how it can continue
in the present, spoken as the language of peoplehood. As discussed above, reconnecting
with people and heritage, apart from self-managing, is identified to be the core motivation
of speaking, learning and revitalising MPC. As such, in planning MPC language
revitalisation, it is essential to integrate their values and way-of-life that are close to their
hearts. These would include topics on livelihood (e.g. fishermen), culture (e.g. food,
cultural activities) and how peoplehood is valued by PS MPC-speaking group members:
[E7.14, B30, R]
R: Do you talk to your family members or friends about the future of the
Portuguese language?
B30: No, no, I don’t. So far I haven’t come uh… in that stage yet la… But I talk
to the younger generation like I say that the young children, you know, more a bit
in English and more a bit… a bit of Portuguese. A bit, a bit so in order they will
pick it up. So that is how we must talk to them. We must talk to them in English
and as well in Portuguese, cause these are the subjects they are learning in school
and this is their talking every day with their parents. So we… we will continue
talking to them, few words also never mind. At least out of five por… two or three
words also never mind. So that’s what keeps the children from learning, so they
will learn. “Eh, why the uncle talking in Portuguese?” They will ask and then we
speak to them and slowly they will learn and then they will talk to us back again
in Portuguese.
R: B30, if it is up to you, and if you had support from the community and you had
funding, you had enough financial resources, would you like to do anything for
the language?
B30: Yes. If I have the resources, I will do. I’ll preserve it and I’ll talk and… and
make sure that I will get the people, the young generations and get the old
generations to come in and speak to them, explain to them properly how to use
the phrases in the words. Papia Kristang Antigu or Papia Portuguese Antigu, let
them learn. This… these are the things that, you know, if you don’t keep, if you
don’t speak, it will die off.
R: How do you think… these young people and the elder people can be brought
together?
B30: Eh, you must need a funding la... Main thing is that you… you must need a
funding and you need a place. I know a couple in KL, she’s a Portuguese Eurasian,
and… her relations are here. But, you know, certain words she forgets, she does
because she used to talking in English, working in KL and the only thing they talk
is in English and Bahasa, and maybe whatever it is they are learning but they are…
they lost. They’re… they’re lo… uh… they can speak Portuguese. Not much, few
words, so they come and ask me, I give them. I share it to them. Ah… then certain
words they have asked me, I tell them. What it means, how to talk. So they…
223
they’re… they’re coming back again, you see, the younger generation are coming
back to learn what they have lost. That is very important, you see… So we don’t
like… An example, if you come and ask, I’ll give. If… if nobody ask, I won’t
give, you know… It’s no point of you taking the… the camel to the well and ask
him to drink when he doesn’t want to drink, right? So you must be able to have
that… that thinking, “Aiyoh (Malay expression, similar to ‘alas’), I lost my full
mother’s… my mother’s tongue.” You know? “So I must speak again. Catch it
back again.” Come, I will teach. No problem, and then you go back you practice
it. Talk to your husband or talk to your… then, teach your children.
R: So you think um… to bring the people together, if it’s in the Portuguese
settlement, you may need a place, you will need funding?
B30: No, you need the funding to go out and meet them. Don’t bring them in one
place. You know, like you want to keep the culture, the language alive, don’t bring
them in one place; go and visit them.
R: So…
B30: The words must go to them. Go to their houses and visit them.
R: So it… if it’s just in the Portuguese settlement, you think maybe a group of
people can… and go to…
B30: go round and visit them, talk to them. This is how you keep the thing alive.
You see… you ask them to come out from the house and come here, they got no
time. They have commitments at home, they have… they got children to take care
of, they have to cook, you know… they have to clean the house. So if you can
spend ah… if you got a few people to go out and talk to them, today, OK uh…
you go to (xxx) Road, OK, how many houses you have got? So you OK, you break
it into three days. OK today you go to three-four houses and talk to them. Talk,
talk, talk, talk, then OK. And then tomorrow you go to another three or four
houses, just of… no need to spend hours.
R: So what will the people talk about? Do they talk about daily life or…?
B30: No, you… when you go there, you talk to them; you let them talk to you
about what they want to talk.
R: In Portuguese (MPC)?
B30: In Portuguese (MPC). And then if they find comfortable in talking to you in
English, talk, but then you explain back to them in Portuguese. That’s how you
keep the culture, that’s how you keep the… the language alive. They forgot how
to use it, so you teach them how to use it by let them converse to you in English;
you converse them in Portuguese. “Oh, that’s all, this is what it means, OK, OK.”
So then they will use it back again, you know… You must go out, don’t bring
them together here. Go out, go and visit them.
224
As discussed in Chapter 6, the awareness on heritage, ownership and language
revitalisation among language revitalisation actors has come from a combination of
internal and external motivations, including the construction of knowledge and
interaction between researchers and group members in the past, present and future,
whether the knowledge-sharing is direct or indirect, intentional or not so. Generally, PS
MPC-speaking group members found experts, teachers and researchers coming into the
PS to do work in relation to their heritage language a positive sign as long as there is
agreement between both parties and there is respect appropriate to the local culture.
Research participants generally expressed that they enjoyed the experiences of being
involved in language revitalisation efforts, such as participating in language
documentation and language classes. The chances of further collaborative efforts appear
to be welcomed, as expressed by research participants, hoping for more help and advice
in language revitalisation. Ultimately, researchers will have to consider how they can
offer help if asked or at least help identify what could hinder language revitalisation
efforts.
There are three main arguments throughout this thesis. This thesis demonstrates
the relevance of considering the role of MPC in the present socio-economic systems and
of influencing and bridging behaviours and the psychological dimension: ideologies and
identities. The second argument concerns how studying present circumstances has to
consider the socio-historical and political development and that the present circumstances
are part of larger social processes. The third argument concerns the choices individuals
and groups may make in social processes and by recognising the agency of minority
groups and embracing multilingualism in its fullest way possible, the minority groups can
get involved in efforts and decision-making processes in relation to their heritage
225
language. Motivation is an important notion to consider in language revitalisation
research as it drives social processes while also being driven by social processes.
Motivations of speaking, learning and revitalising have been considered in this thesis. A
range and combination of internal (i.e. motivations emerging from inner dimensions,
ideologies and identifications), external (i.e. motivations emerging from community-
external sources), inward-looking (i.e. looking to the PS MPC-speaking community) and
outward-looking (i.e. looking to outside the PS MPC-speaking community) motivations
are closely linked. The motivations that inspire and encourage initiation and involvement
in language revitalisation, though the personal pursuit in motivations is evident but this
does not mean this cannot be for a good cause, that have been identified are discussed in
relation to possible considerations in MPC language revitalisation.
The take on language endangerment and language revitalisation throughout this
thesis as a social process is informed by the interaction between micro processes and
macro settings (e.g. power relations, social structure, socio-economic conditions), based
on data and on past research. That micro processes can be seen as response to or resistance
to macro policies and an act of self-determination has been recognised (Baldauf, 2006).
Whether all parties that might be involved in language revitalisation are aware of or
conscious about it, language revitalisation processes become a proxy for wider socio-
political struggles (Woolard, 1998). Language revitalisation in reality is not just about
language, it is part of a larger social movement, depending on larger social forces.
To be more specific, this research is informed by the interaction between
motivation, agency, culture or language-cultural nexus, language-ideological aspects and
power, seeing how these continue to interact, construct and reconstruct identity and
ideologies to represent an aspect of social life. The bottom-up MPC language
revitalisation is being done in a way where people are looking for networks to reconnect
with MPC and heritage (e.g. language classes, meet-up groups, social media groups),
226
fulfilling the needs of peoplehood and communities of practice, and also communicative
and affective needs. In Wendel and Heinrich’s (2012: 163-164) terms, “What is needed
is scholarship that takes as its point of departure minority perspectives and issues in an
effort to develop greater insights into the dynamics of language endangerment”. The
tensions and concerns emerged in this research are shared by other minority groups across
the world (e.g. minority language situations in Grenoble & Whaley, 1998). As shown in
other case studies, a language in a situation as MPC, which is probably in the middle on
a possible continuum of language vitality, with a total language loss and an imagined
“healthy” language (but evolving and changing nonetheless) on both sides of the
continuum, is one that can be worked on but whether group members involve themselves
in the language efforts is something that needs even more work.
The present trends in language and linguistic research, whether it is the
epistemological shifts that have driven researchers or more research findings have driven
the epistemological shifts though a combination of both is most likely, have come to be
more positive and encouraging than ever to language revitalisation and contact language
studies. The same can be said about embracing multilingualism. In planning tangible
actions in language revitalisation, researchers are reminded that ideological clarification
is complex and should be on-going instead of regarded as a final-end product (Bowern,
2011; Dauenhauer & Daunhauer, 1998; King, 2001). Language revitalisation is not just
about revitalising the language of the past, it is necessary to situate the language in its
current context, while building on its historical trajectories. If group members express
something differently from what researchers may have in mind as the group’s goals,
Bowern (2011) reminds researchers that it is viable to start with short term goals and work
from there. More importantly, language revitalisation brings group members closer to
their heritage as a way of reconnecting with their MPC and heritage (connection to culture
and identity), brings a sense of empowerment and self-determination by reclaiming
227
ownership (empowerment) and can add to the overall group’s well-being and
development. Via a cooperative framework, the relationship between researchers and the
researched are writing new pages on the language revitalisation scenes. Present and future
language revitalisation planning and practice will have to balance between learning from
previous researchers and improvising research, planning and practice as languages evolve
following social processes in the ecology.
228
CHAPTER 8: REFLECTIONS
8.1 Introduction
In this concluding chapter, reflections from conducting this study are discussed
from three perspectives: working on MPC language revitalisation, employing
Constructivist Grounded Theory and situating the present study in wider contexts.
Reflections from working on MPC language revitalisation present after thoughts and
ideas that emerged from working on MPC and with MPC-speaking group members. The
next section on reflections from employing Constructivist Grounded Theory discusses the
research process and challenges faced before, as mentioned in Chapter 4, revisiting the
four criteria of Grounded Theory research (Charmaz, 2006, 2014). These four criteria
helped examine the extent of this research and whether I had allowed the data to speak to
me, guided by the verification process in Grounded Theory which is the explicit
systematic checks and refinements (see Section 4.6 and Section 5.4.4).
Towards the end of this chapter, in Section 8.4, where the present study stands in
relation to the body of literature and wider contexts are discussed, covering matters
including the researcher’s positioning. The gaps that the present study would eventually
fill were presented in a general way in Chapter 1 (see motivations and justifications of
the present research in Section 1.1, the significance of the present study in Section 1.4).
This is due to the natural progress and characteristics of a study employing a bottom-up
approach like Grounded Theory. It is after researchers have completed data analysis and
theoretical conceptualisation that they are able to identify more specifically about the gaps
the process and outcome of research have filled.
229
8.2 Reflections: MPC Language Revitalisation
Drawing from the experiences of the PS MPC-speaking group members in
managing the relevance of their heritage language as part of their social life, this thesis
examines coping strategies as uncovered in discourses (e.g. reclaiming ownership,
rendering control to others or preferring ambiguity) and actions (e.g. participating in
language revitalisation or not) that underpin the MPC language revitalisation process
cycle. The codes and categories emerged as temporal sequences that are linked and fill
up the sub-processes of the MPC language revitalisation process cycle though it is
acknowledged that in reality and in practice, the temporal sequences are not as orderly as
depicted. Such a depiction is meant to profile and conceptualise the MPC language
revitalisation process cycle and sub-processes, and put things into perspectives. This
allows teasing out the meanings and actions in the MPC language revitalisation process
cycle. Through these meanings and actions, the saliency and dynamics of meanings and
actions as emerged from codes and categories that make up the discussions on the salient
meanings and actions in how MPC relevance is managed (Chapter 6), and the dynamics
of meanings and actions (Chapter 7) against the local MPC language revitalisation efforts
and the wider multilingual and post-colonial context (Chapter 2).
Similar to many other minority groups which is sometimes expected or even taken
as a given, the present bottom-up MPC language revitalisation relies on the paradigm of
language essentialism, portraying the symbolic representation of MPC in the public
spheres and in the talks on, among others, language authenticity, ownership and literacy
for MPC. Such an orientation, if examined against the socio-historical and political
development, goes back to colonial, post-colonial or nation-state and Western (Dorian,
1998) ideologies which continue to interact with the ideologies of a new society and a
new language (in the sense as referred to in Ansaldo, 2009) and the contemporary trends.
The shifts in paradigms that allow the embracing of multilingualism and diversity
230
(Chapter 3), such as those of language ecology and language evolution, are yet to reach
the practices and processes on the ground, as the shifts are still mostly the talk among
philosophers and researchers in contrast to practice and reality.
This research provides concrete evidence and propositions for understanding and
approaching the on-the-ground MPC language revitalisation process cycle. Past MPC
research has generally focused on social factors of language maintenance and language
endangerment (e.g. Lee, 2011) and interpreting Portuguese Eurasian or Kristang identity
construction (e.g. O’Neill, 2008; Sarkissian, 2005). This thesis extends MPC research to
group members’ experiences and expressivity, particularly meanings of language
revitalisation efforts to group members. The dynamics and variation of voices underlying
the group of people who identify with the PS and a MPC-speaking heritage are
demonstrated while examining their individual and overall collective experiences,
perspectives and ideologies. In this thesis, the PS MPC-speaking group members’ voice
and agency emerged through the bottom-up approach and co-construction between the
researcher and research participants of this research. How language revitalisation actors
are driven by a range and combination of motivations to step forward, take control and
reclaim their heritage language are demonstrated. Attempts are also made to understand
and explain the gap between what is done and what is said and perceived via the
accumulating and interacting ideologies from the socio-historical and political
development. Values and matters that are close to the people’s heart are identified,
generally revolving around reconnecting with heritage (e.g. inheriting traditional ways-
of-life and knowledge, acts of identity in the sense of Croft, 2003 or identity or multiple
alignment in the sense of Ansaldo, 2009) and peoplehood (e.g. communicative and
affective functions of language, communities of practice, the social space-time in the
sense of Anderson, 2009) in social processes.
231
In terms of language endangerment and language revitalisation (more on this topic
in Section 8.4), this thesis adds to the studies on minority groups’ constructed and
reconstructed experiences that have been reported to cross temporal and spatial borders
and construct boundaries (e.g. see a special edition on Reconceptualising Endangered
Language Communities, Language & Communication (38), as contributed by, among
others, Avineri, [2014], Kroskrity [2014]). This research also demonstrates the
conception and conceptualisations of group members who speak a contact language as
their heritage language in relation to a part of their social life as exhibited through the
bottom-up language revitalisation process, adding to studies on contact languages.
This thesis was written while being aware of different perspectives on the take of
language revitalisation among scholars and researchers: whether one should work via a
community-based or lone wolf approach (Bowern & Warner, 2015; Cripen & Robinson,
2013) or whether one should be involved in community work and give back to the
community or focus only on scholarly work (Ladefoged, 1992; Dorian, 1993; Austin &
Sallabank, 2014). The general answer to the different takes might be to each its own. This
thesis is aligned with a collaborative nature and sees work as co-constructed between the
researcher and research participants (Austin & Sallabank, 2014; Charmaz, 2006, 2014;
Crowley, 2007). That it is hoped that this work can add to the empowering of the group
in study underpins this thesis by acknowledging and recognising group members’
contributions to MPC language revitalisation efforts, either as actors, participants or
group members who have added to the overall cultural climate.
The present overall cultural climate is encouraging for MPC language
revitalisation, for reasons discussed throughout this thesis (Chapter 1, 2, 6 and 7). The
present MPC language revitalisation efforts are on-the-ground, spontaneous and sporadic.
What can be learned from the studies on language revitalisation thus far is how top-down
232
policies (e.g. legitimatising the status of a heritage language in institutional context and
public spheres either as a symbolic representation or functional use, achieving formal
literacy status) and bottom-up processes can complement and support each other. As
observed within the PS, the present perceptions on having MPC as a school subject
remains an idea that is far and detached, as many group members did not know prior to
this research about their language rights as established in the constitution, particularly
their rights to a MPC mother tongue program. By now, we are aware of the studies in
which researchers have reported on how having an endangered language achieve a formal,
legitimate and symbolic status does not guarantee the language vitality as it takes
primarily group members’ commitment to the use of a language for a language to be vital
although a combination of both are ideal and have shown to work for some languages
such as Maori, as discussed by Spolsky (2004, see also Austin & Sallabank, 2014;
Fishman, 1991, 2001; Hinton & Hale, 2001; Hornberger, 2002). However, it is also
argued that achieving a certain status is a boost to the prestige and image of a language
(Ager, 2005; Sallabank, 2005).
Though we can never say for sure how an endangered language that is left to
develop without intervention will turn out to be, it is reminded that it may be too late
when group members want intervention to be introduced when a language is deemed
severely endangered and there is little that has captured its fuller form that can be used
for language revitalisation (e.g. Sallabank, 2013). When a heritage language like MPC
has lost speakers over generations due to its role no longer being relevant in the present
socio-economic system (Mufwene, 2003) and other factors (e.g. migration, intermarriage)
as discussed in the previous chapters, somehow, the PS MPC-speaking group members
will have to make some decisions regarding whether further language efforts are what the
group members want, and if affirmative, what approach, form and outcome the efforts
would be.
233
8.3 Reflections: A Constructivist Grounded Theory Approach
Employing a bottom-up approach has led this research to be more
multidisciplinary than initially imagined. Such an outcome is based on theoretical leads
and directions pursued in the course of study, in search of ways to explain relationships
between codes, categories and concepts as emerged from data. As explained in Chapter 1
and 5, to explore the nature and impact of bottom-up revitalisation effort would involve
evaluating the efforts and this would risk imposing ideas on group members without
understanding their experiences. Considerations such as this lead to the choice of
theoretical approach of this research, Constructivist Grounded Theory (Charmaz, 2006,
2014).
This thesis has come to focus on what it does, following the conceptual and
development working from codes to categories and finally concepts. Figure 8.1 shows an
overview of what this thesis has come to focus on.
234
Representing a part of social life (experiences interacting with macro settings and in micro processes,
expressivity)
Theoretical lens checked constantly and finalised: Talking about language and language revitalisation
as sites for drawing upon multiple identities and ideologies in self managing
Going beyond the theme to explain motivations or goals of managing relevance of heritage language:
The extent of aligning with a self identifying with a MPC-speaking heritage
A theme emerged: Coping strategies in managing relevance of heritage language through language use
(and actions); theme and properties checked through theoretical sampling, re-examining initial data
and literature
Concepts and categories checked through theoretical sampling, re-examining initial data and literature
Categories of experiences filling up sub-processes of bottom-up MPC language revitalisation process

cycle
Coding experiences, with a focus on meanings and actions
Exploring what bottom-up MPC language revitalisation efforts are and reactions towards efforts
Figure 8.1: An overview of how this thesis developed a focus
A bottom-up approach was chosen at the beginning of this research, for
considerations and reasons that would allow this research to continue the nature of prior
fieldwork and connections built in earlier trips with the PS MPC-speaking group members
to explore language revitalisation efforts initiated by group members and reactions
towards efforts while recognising that every endangered or heritage language case is
individual and unique (Chapter 1 and 4). Although the focus of this study was general
and only came to shape up gradually in the research process, the purpose of research was
235
clear in seeing language as the central topic of debate (Blommaert, 1999) instead of
testing hypotheses or theories or examining linguistic aspects. An exploratory study was
deemed more suitable to minimise pre-assumptions, remind or even force researchers to
check their assumptions throughout the research process as it can show if data do not
reflect the codes, categories and concepts that are leading up to the final product. The
decisions on choosing a research approach then were based on how one could understand
MPC language revitalisation in view of a seemingly disconnect between efforts and
reactions towards efforts.
A fit was found with Constructivist Grounded Theory as it allowed one to go to
the field without being driven by a theoretical framework while I was kept directed
towards the pursuit of knowledge in a substantive area. It acknowledges bias and that
knowledge is co-constructed between the researcher and research participants. As such, a
researcher employing Constructivist Grounded Theory will somehow be forced to
question the fit between data and concepts repeatedly and constantly while checking
against any assumptions or imposing of ideas and concepts until there is a fit between
data and the final product, be it a framework, model or theory.
The nature of fieldwork and employing Grounded Theory Methodology (Chapter
3) are similar in certain aspects, particularly the uncertain conditions ahead in the conduct
of research. The inductive nature of this research often was faced with the logico-
deductive, conventional format in different stages of institutional research assessment,
research sharing in conferences and journals or funding application, such as the
requirement of reporting on the scale and size of sampling, the duration of data collection
and data analysis, the number of chapters and even the way one writes as one is
encouraged to write to represent the emergent nature of research process which had to be
236
moderated against a more conventional format. Eventually, attempts were made to
balance between the inductive nature and deductive format.
The process of employing Grounded Theory Methodology is iterative and moves
between looking at data in an inductive and abductive way (Chapter 4). The research
process is guided but it can be challenging for researchers to have to bear with ambiguity
for a long period while having to keep to a productive timeline. The focus on coding for
actions and processes in Constructivist Grounded Theory, instead of topics, and the focus
on sampling for categories and concepts, rather than people, guide researchers to consider
relationships between codes, categories and concepts and search for ways to explain the
relationships by constant comparison and trials. Inevitably, the research process is part of
the final product of research. The take on verification of research in the present study is
discussed in Chapter 4 (Section 4.6). This thesis follows Bryant and Charmaz (2007a: 19)
who acknowledge that independent testing for validation of theory, if one is not talking
about testing for theorising can be problematic for Grounded Theory Method.
The four criteria of Grounded Theory research that can be seen a point of reference
and reflection in employing Constructivist Grounded Theory (Charmaz, 2014: 355-357)
and how they have been met by this research are discussed below.
i. Credibility (Has your research achieved intimate familiarity with the setting or
topic?; Are the data sufficient to merit your claims? Consider the range, number,
and depth of observations contained in the data; Have you made systematic
comparisons between observations and between categories?; Do the categories
cover a wide range of empirical observations?; Are there strong logical links
between the gathered data and your argument and analysis?; Has your research
provided enough evidence for your claims to allow the reader to form an
independent assessment – and agree with your claims?)
237
A familiarity with the setting was established prior to undertaking data collection
for this research with field experiences gained at the same research site for a
language and culture documentation (Pillai, 2013) and a study (Pillai, Soh &
Kajita, 2014). The data are believed to merit the claims of this thesis as the
categories emerged from and cover a wide range of empirical observations,
namely from primary data (conversations, language survey, observations on the
ground and in social media) and secondary data (data from previous projects
involved, examination of MPC materials, literature). Links between the gathered
data and the arguments and analysis of this thesis were established through an
exploratory and guided process (see Chapter 5 and Table 8.1 for how this thesis
came to focus on what it does) which required constant comparison between sets
of data or across data and between codes, categories and concepts. In proposing a
continuum of managing MPC relevance set against the local language
revitalisation efforts and a wider multilingual and postcolonial context, this thesis
provides a new way of approaching the PS MPC-speaking group members’
experiences and expressivity in representing a part of their social life. Concrete
evidence is provided for the MPC language revitalisation process cycle, the
coping strategies of the group in study in managing relevance of their heritage
language via language use and actions, group members’ making sense and
conceptualising their experiences in relation to their heritage language, and the
dynamics of meanings, perceptions, ideologies and identities alignment among
group members. These evidence, along with the considerations of different
dimensions (linguistic, psychological, socio-historical and political,
epistemological and ontological) and different frameworks and orientations
(linguistic anthropology, language ecology, language contact, language evolution,
language revitalisation, language planning and policy, sociolinguistics) in
238
theoretical conceptualisation and in explaining what has been conceptualised,
make a strong case for the analysis, arguments and propositions of this thesis. The
strong case is supported by a chain of evidence, as demonstrated by the MPC
language revitalisation process cycle which gave rise to the continuum of
managing MPC relevance, and by situating the process cycle and MPC relevance
managing in wider contexts.
ii. Originality (Are your categories fresh? Do they offer new insights?; Does your
analysis provide a new conceptual rendering of the data?; What is the social and
theoretical significance of this work?; How does Grounded Theory challenge,
extend or refine current ideas, concepts and practices?)
Categories used were considered in terms of whether meanings and actions were
captured to convey the intended message to readers and in how a fresh perspective
could be gathered from data to look at MPC and MPC-speaking group members.
These categories offer new insights to MPC work in that group members’
experiences, expressivity and ideologies that have not been approached in ways
as approached in this research, particularly the bottom-up process and drawing
upon different dimensions and different frameworks and orientations. The new
insights allow readers to consider the present circumstances related to MPC and
MPC-speaking group members from the perspectives of different dimensions, of
different frameworks and orientations (see above). By approaching the micro
processes as part of larger social processes, the forces that are at play are also
considered. The forces include not only political and social forces but also the
global epistemological and ontological shifts. The new insights gained by the
different dimensions, frameworks and orientations provide a new conceptual
rendering of the data. Theoretically, this thesis adds to studies examining micro-
239
processes from minority group members’ perspective and allow their agency and
expressivity to emerge through their experiences via discourses and coping
strategies and to contact language and contact language revitalisation studies.
Socially, this thesis profiles, recognises and reflects the contributions of group
members towards language revitalisation and linguistic empowerment. Drawing
upon Constructivist Grounded Theory has allowed the contact-language speaking
group members’ experiences to extend MPC research to be considered in an
ecological way, considering the interaction (i) between the group members and
the social worlds, (ii) of accumulating ideologies over time, (iii) between language
revitalisation studies or contact language studies and the global, epistemological
and ontological trends, and (iv) between linguistic, psychological and social or
global dimensions. The findings of this thesis demonstrate the relevance of
considering these interactions to avoid a superficial understanding of the people
and their experiences.
iii. Resonance (Do the categories portray fullness of the studied experience?; Have
you revealed both liminal and unstable taken-for-granted meanings?; Have you
drawn links between larger collectivities or institutions and individual lives, when
the data are so indicate?; Does the Grounded Theory make sense to your
participants or people who share their circumstances? Does your analysis offer
them deeper insights about their lives and worlds?)
The categories in the MPC language revitalisation process cycle are linked
temporal sequences to represent sub-processes of a larger process. Experiences
are abstracted into a continuum of managing relevance of heritage language to
conceptualise the actions and meanings in the data. Links are drawn between
larger collectivities or institutions (e.g. colonial powers, multilingual setting,
240
nation-state policy makers, and researchers’ paradigms) and individual lives.
Without considering the interactions above, the experiences of the people might
not have been captured and understood in a fuller form as the experiences of the
people are sometimes taken as granted or pre-assumed because of their present
circumstances. Parts of findings were discussed in recorded or off-the-record
conversations with research participants in order to see if findings make sense to
them as a way of checking if ideas have been imposed upon participants.
Conversations were engaged with research participants to see how their
experiences of part of their social life could be conceptualised to gain deeper
insights about their lives and worlds.
iv. Usefulness (Does your analysis offer interpretations that people can use in their
everyday worlds?; Do your analytic categories suggest any generic processes?; If
so, have you examined these generic processes for tacit implications?; Can the
analysis spark further research in other substantive areas?; How does your work
contribute to knowledge? How does it contribute to making a better world?)
In line with the move from specific to general interpretations in the understanding
of processes in a substantive area as part of larger social processes in
Constructivist Grounded Theory, Chapter 7 discusses the implications of findings
in relation to different aspects (e.g. language purism, language ownership) and
components (e.g. motivations, considerations in practice) to be considered in
language revitalisation after generic processes are identified and discussed in
Chapter 6. The analysis opens up conversations on further language revitalisation
efforts and contact language studies. It builds on data and past research and
examines one’s bias, assumptions, paradigm and positioning in relation to
studying a heritage language which is also a contact language and the processes
241
involved in managing relevance of it and revitalising it against wider contexts and
from different dimensions. Implicitly or explicitly, it argues against seeing
minority group members as without agency, motivations and expressivity. The
substantive model presented in Chapter 6 provides a new way of approaching
studies on MPC and MPC-speaking group members, in that it is based on a chain
of evidence that emerged and was established based on the conceptions and
conceptualisations of group members’ experience, expressivity and dynamics.
Employing Constructivist Grounded Theory, the micro-processes were allowed to
be approached with reflexivity. I had to reflect from time to time on choices made
in research process in acknowledging bias and becoming reflexive in responding
to bias.
To wrap up this section, employing a bottom-up approach, Constructivist
Grounded Theory, has made it possible for the voice of the PS MPC-speaking group
members to “emerge more organically than would have been possible”, in the words of
my supervisor. As I reflected upon the research process, I did wonder about how the
present study would turn out to be if I had taken another approach. Since I will never
know how it would be, I would like to at least think that there is, essentially, a difference
between setting out to study matters such as language and identity and allowing voices in
relation to these matters to emerge from conversations and “speak for themselves”.
8.4 Reflections: Situating the Present Study in Wider Contexts
As mentioned previously (Section 1.4, 8.2), the present study proposes a new way
of approaching a minority, contact- and heritage-language-speaking group in managing
242
the relevance of their heritage language, employs a bottom-up approach and adds to the
under-represented contact language (revitalisation) studies. Chapter 7 and Section 8.2
discuss how implications of the present study can be drawn to understand the tensions,
ideologies and motivations, and to be considered in planning MPC language revitalisation
efforts. Section 7.4 deals particularly with (i) How can the substantive model of managing
MPC relevance be drawn upon in further language revitalisation efforts? and (ii) How
can language revitalisation efforts engage and reach out to the recipients?. Based on what
the present study has demonstrated, this section deals more specifically with how it can
be situated and the gaps it has come to fill in relation to (i) the international body of
literature, with a focus on the conceptual and practical considerations, and (ii) the wider
contexts, which are reflected in the ecological approach of the present study.
The present study fills a gap in the body of literature via how it extends a new
theoretical framework to the language revitalisation studies and fieldwork methods. It is
the first to apply Grounded Theory to MPC language revitalisation, and is also one of the
few to do so when situated in the international language revitalisation literature (see
Section 4.7). The theoretical framework of a Grounded Theory is built from the data and
by relating the framework-in-progress to the literature while in most cases, a theoretical
framework is built from the literature which is then applied and extended based on
findings which Urquhart (2013) associates with more of a theory-testing approach. By
adapting from and applying Grounded Theory to the substantive topic on language
revitalisation, and building on existing knowledge while drawing from a range of
frameworks, the present study provides new insights that were not recognised or not
easily categorised as new concepts, theory or specific implications or in more traditional
approaches. The four major components in the substantive model of managing heritage
language relevance (Figure 6.7) are grounded in data and in everyday contexts: their
“grounded” nature is why the model provides rich and fresh insights. These insights
243
developed from coding which is also research procedure or tool that is used in a different
manner compared to other more traditional approaches, in that the coding process is not
top-down where the codes come from the literature, nor is it mid-range coding where the
codes come from both the literature and the data itself (Urquhart, 2013). In retrospect, I
can now understand why Star (2007: 80) writes “a code sets up a relationship with your
data, and with your respondents”. Researchers start with data, work from the data and go
back to the data whenever necessary to work out how best they can unravel the emerging
ideas and concepts and the relationships within, in order to understand or explain a
substantive area in its everyday contexts. An ecological strand naturally underlies the
approach to heritage language management in that all contextual factors are able to
considered and discussed with a bottom-up approach.
The present work demonstrates the cause-and-effect relationship between one’s
chosen approach and practice (see Section 2.6 for how the PS MPC-speaking group
members are portrayed in the literature using other approaches). Other than the general
idea of how I saw myself as a researcher prior to starting this doctoral study (see Section
4.2), employing Constructivist Grounded Theory had weighed in on my positioning as a
researcher conceptually, ethically and in practice. Although a researcher’s positioning in
relation to the research topic and participants is usually presented early in a thesis, the
inductive nature of the present research approach is the reason why only a general idea of
how I saw myself as a researcher before and during the research and how it interacted
with my research process is mentioned in the preceding chapters (see Section 1.2, 4.3,
5.2.3). Conceptually and ethically, the choice of my approach had made my intention to
be an open-minded and reflexive but guided (since I considered myself a novice fieldwork
researcher though I had experience assisting in previous fieldwork projects) researcher
possible. In contrast to employing research approaches that require researchers to decide
from the beginning whether they are to be objective or subjective, more in control or not,
244
emotionally-detached or not, in control or not, or an outsider or insider, researchers
employing Constructivist Grounded Theory set out to be reflexive about any choices that
will be made and open-minded in learning about the studied world.
In practice, in the beginning, I struggled and grappled with the idea of following
the heuristic guidelines and adapting from Constructivist Grounded Theory. The concept
of all is data was rather new to me. I found going back to (i) the data, (ii) my research
purpose and (iii) Grounded Theory researchers’ sharing of their research experience most
useful, including Charmaz (2006, 2014)’s sharing. Equally important was allowing
myself time to be confused and lost while trying to make sense of what the data was trying
to speak to me. The tensions that arose in the research process made me question if I was
as open-minded as I hoped to be and to acknowledge my bias, assumptions and
impositions. Later, I realised how confronting my bias, assumptions and impositions,
when I did not think my work reflected the experiences and expressivity of my research
participants, helped me to see things in ways previously not thought of or brushed aside.
As researchers are seen as part of the research process, the reflexive strand of
Constructivist Grounded Theory helped maintain my positioning as an open-minded
researcher who was learning about the studied world, seeing data and analyses as social
constructions and knowledge gained about the studied world as co-constructed between
researcher and research participants. Throughout the research process, Grounded Theory
researchers explicitly examine and re-examine the emerging codes, categories, concepts
and their relationships to one another. Simultaneously and naturally, the examinations
also involve examining one’s position and pre-conceived ideas in relation the studied
world. This study also shows that this perspective is possible and adds to the studies that
employ a knowledge-sharing and community-based approach while building a theory or
model, in this case.
245
As for how the present study can be situated in the wider contexts, it adds to the
encouraging overall cultural climate of MPC language revitalisation efforts. Parts of the
findings of the present study are being used for decision-making and communication with
group members in planning language teaching materials and a collaborative, knowledge-
sharing approach is likely to continue. However, the society both research participants
and I are a part of has yet to fully embrace the notion of being part of a multilingual and
multicultural society, as reflected in the data. Despite the encouraging overall cultural
climate for MPC language revitalisation efforts, some research participants expressed that
they are happy when they hear the world outside knows of their presence (see Section
6.3.6.3). The policies and rights for the minority group in study also remain detached
from the minority group members on the ground, as reflected in this study: they were not
consulted in matters directly affecting their livelihood and well-being. It goes to show
how the present social system is working. This research demonstrates the need to support
the overall development of minority groups and that given the exposure, mobility and
access, minority groups are empowered, as reflected by discussions on agency and control
in this study (see Section 6.3.1, 6.4 and 7.2), to reclaim their rights in the hope of
sustaining their livelihood, culture and group.
To sustain the bottom-up MPC language revitalisation, it requires what group
members have been doing all along: the nostalgia, the peoplehood, the drawing on MPC
as a symbolic ethnic or cultural marker are among the combination of alignment with a
MPC-speaking heritage. Even though the paradigm of language essentialism is heavily
relied in the present MPC language revitalisation, research has shown the symbolic use
of an endangered language is still an important link in language revitalisation. It is
246
important to recognise and acknowledge what have been done so far, be it done as a given
or intentionally as efforts. What is to be decided by the group members (or not decided,
see Ladefoged, 1992, when he asked “Who am I to say he was wrong?” while observing
Swahili become the language of the educated in place of Dahalo, see also response
towards this question among other matters in Dorian, 1993) remains something to be “had
from the inside” (Dorian, 1998). Research thus far has shown that with exposure and
collaborative work, minority groups are interested and willing to take a leap of faith, as
evident in the growing number of studies on language revitalisation (e.g. Austin &
Sallabank, 2014; Grenoble & Whaley, 2006; Hinton & Hale, 2001) even in times when
language revitalisation may be predicted to be unsuccessful (Dorian, 1987).
Looking back on the MPC language revitalisation, to reconcile the variety of
meanings and actions as shown in this thesis (Chapter 7), other than exposure to what
other minority groups are experiencing and doing to keep their heritage languages vital
and relevant in the present and in the future, going back to what a language is essentially
for the people can perhaps help group members see their present dynamics of meanings
and actions (e.g. the division on views on goals, needs and other possible tensions and
conflicts) in a new light:
To have a language means to be part of a community of people who engage in
joint, common activities through the use of a largely, but never completely, shared
range of communicative resources. In this sense, having a language also means
being part of a tradition, sharing a history, and hence access to a collective
memory, full of stories, innuendoes, opinions, recipes, and other things that make
us human. Not having a language or having only a very limited set of its resources
means to be denied such access. (Duranti, 1997: 334)
247
This thesis ends with a more positive note, on embracing multilingualism and the
dynamics of the PS MPC-speaking group members (in the sense of Dorian, 1993), in the
hope of seeing opportunities and possibilities amidst the range of meaning-makings,
perceptions and ideologies among group members as more group members feel
empowered and self-determined to come together and to reclaim their heritage language.
248
REFERENCES
Attractions in Malaysia. (2012). Portuguese square. Retrieved June 8, 2015, from

http://malacca.attractionsinmalaysia.com/Portugues-Square.php
Melaka State Government. (2012). Community In Melaka - Official State Government

Portal [Page]. Retrieved from
http://www.melaka.gov.my/en/pelancongan/masyarakat-di-melaka
Ager, D. (2001). Motivation in Language Planning and Policy. Clevedon: Multilingual

Matters.
Ager, D. (2005). Prestige and image planning. In Hinkel, E. (Ed.) Handbook of

Research in Second Language Teaching and Learning (Chapter 56). Mahwah,
NJ: Erlbaum.
Anderson, J. D. (2009). Contradictions across space-time and language ideologies in

Northern Arapaho language shift. In Kroskrity, P. V. & M. C. Field (Eds.),
Native American Language Ideologies: Beliefs, Practices, and Struggles in
Indian Country (pp. 48-76). Arizona: The University of Arizona Press.
Ansaldo, U. (2009). Contact Languages: Ecology and Evolution in Asia. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.
Austin, P. K., & Sallabank, J. (2014). Introduction. In Austin, P. K. & J. Sallbank

(Eds.), Endangered languages: Beliefs and language ideologies in language
documentation and language revitalisation (pp. 1-26). Oxford, UK: Oxford
University Press.
Avineri, N. (2014). Yiddish endangerment as phenomenological reality and discursive

strategy: Crossing into the past and crossing out the present. Language &
Communication, 38, 8-17.
Baker, C. (1992). Attitudes and language. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Baldauf, R. B. (2006). Rearticulating the case for micro language planning in a

language ecology context. Current issues in Language Planning, 7(2), 147-170.
Baldauf, R. B. Jr.,& Kaplan, R. B. (2003). Language policy decisions and power: Who
are the actors? In Ryan, P. M. & R. Terborg (Eds.), Language: Issues of
Inequality (pp. 19-37). Mexico City: Universidad Nacional Autonama de
Mexico.
Bainbridge, R. (2009). Cast all imaginations: Umbi speak. (Unpublished doctoral

dissertation). James Cook University, Australia.
Bankston, C. L. I., & Henry, J. (1998). The silence of the gators: Cajun ethnicity and
intergenerational transmission of Louisiana French. Journal of Multilingual and
Multicultural Development, 19(1), 1-23.
Bartens, A. (2005). The loss of linguistic pluralism: Creoles as endangered languages.
249
UniverSOS, 2, 55-68.
Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal
attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117(3),
497-529.
Baxter, A. N. (1988). A grammar of Kristang. Canberra, Australia: Pacific Linguistics.
Baxter, A. N. (1990). Some obervations on verb serialisation in Malacca Creole

Portuguese. Boletim de Filologia (Lisbon), 31, 161-184.
Baxter, A. N. (1996). Portuguese and Creole Portuguese in the Pacific and Western
Pacific Rim. In Wurm, S. A., Mühlhäusler, P. & D. T. Tryon (Eds.), Atlas of
Languages of Intercultural Communication in the Pacific, Asia, and the
Americas (pp. 299-338). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Baxter, A. N., & De Silva, P. (2004). A dictionary of Kristang (Malacca Creole

Portuguese) - English. Canberra, Australia: Pacific Linguistics.
Baxter, A. N. (2005). Kristang (Malacca Creole Portuguese) - A long-time survivor

seriously endangered. Estudios de Sociolingüística, 6, 1-37.
Baxter, A. N. (2012). The Creole Portuguese Language of Malacca: A delicate ecology.

In Jarnagin, L. (Ed.), Portuguese and Luso-Asian legacies in Southeast Asia,
1511-2011: Culture and identity in the Luso-Asian world: Tenacities and
plasticities (pp. 115-142). Singapore, Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian
Studies.
Baxter, A. N. (2013). Papiá Kristang structure dataset. In Michaelis, S. M., Susanne, P.,
Maurer, M., Haspelmath, M., & Huber, M. (Eds.), Atlas of pidgin and creole
language structures online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary
Anthropology.
Retrieved from http://apics-online.info/contributions/42
Birks, M. (2007). Becoming professional by degree: A Grounded Theory study of nurses

in Malaysian Borneo. (Unpublisehd doctoral dissertation). Monash University,
Australia.
Birks, M., & Mills, J. (2011). Grounded theory: A practical guide. London: SAGE.
Bickerton, D. (1988). Creole languages and the bioprogram. In Newmeyer, F. J. (Ed.),

Linguistics: the Cambridge survey. Vol. 2: Linguistic theory: extensions and
implications (pp. 268-284). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Black, C. A., & Black, H. A. (2012). Grammars for the people, by the people, made
easier using PAWS and XlingPaper. Hawaii: University of Hawai’i Press.
Retrieved from http://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/handle/10125/4532
Blommaert, J. (Ed.). (1999). Language ideological debates. Berlin, Germany: Mouton

de Gruyter.
250
Blommaert, J. (2006). Language ideology. In Brown, K. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of
Language & Linguistics, (2nd ed.) (pp. 510-522). Oxford: Elsevier.
Blommaert, J., & Dong, J. (2010). Ethnographic fieldwork. Clevedon: Multilingual

Matters.
Bourdieu, P. (1991). Language and symbolic power. Cambridge, MA: Harvard

University Press
Bowern, C. (2011). Planning a language documentation project. In Austin, P. K. & J.

Sallabank (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Endangered Languages (pp.
459-482). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bowern, C., & Warner, N. (2015). 'Lone wolves' and collaboration: A reply to Crippen
& Robinson (2013). Language Documentation & Conservation, 9, 59-85.
Bradley, D. (2002). Language attitudes: the key factor in language maintenance. In

Bradley, D. & M. Bradley (Eds.), Language endangerment and language
maintenance: An active approach (pp. 1-10). London: Routledge.
Brandt, E. A., & Ayoungman, V. (1989). A practical guide to language renewal.

Canadian Journal of Native Education, 16(2), 42–77.
Bryant, A. (2002). Re-grounding grounded theory. Journal of Information Technology

Theory and Application, 4(1), 25-42.
Bryant, A., & Charmaz, K. (2007a). Grounded theory research: Methods and practices.
In Bryant, A. & Charmaz, K. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of grounded theory,
(pp. 1-28). London: SAGE.
Bryant, A., & Charmaz, K. (2007b). Grounded theory in historical perspective: An

epistemological account. In Bryant, A. & Charmaz, K. (Eds.), The SAGE
handbook of grounded theory (pp. 31-57). London: SAGE.
Bryant, A., & Charmaz, K. (2010). The SAGE Handbook of Grounded Theory:
Paperback Edition. London: SAGE.
Bucholtz & Hall, (2004). Language & identity. In Duranti, A. (Ed.), A companion to
linguistic anthropology (pp. 369-394). Oxford: Blackwell.
Cardoso, H. C. (2012). Oral traditions of the Luso-Asian communities: Local, regional

and continental. In Jarnagin, L. (Ed.), Portuguese and Luso-Asian legacies in
Southeast Asia, 1511-2011: Culture and identity in the Luso-Asian world:
Tenacities and plasticities (pp. 143-166). Singapore, Singapore: Institute of
Southeast Asian Studies.
Chan K. E. (1969). A study in the social geography of the Malacca Portuguese

Eurasians. (Unpublished master’s thesis). University of Malaya.
Charmaz, K. (1990). Discovering chronic illness: Using grounded theory. Social

Science and Medicine, 30, 1161-1172.
251
Charmaz, K. (1995). Grounded theory. In J. A. Smith, Harré, R. & L. Van Langenhove
(Eds.), Rethinking methods in psychology (pp. 27-49). London: SAGE.
Charmaz, K. (2000). Constructivist and objectivist grounded theory. In N. K. Denzin &

Y. Lincoln (Eds), Handbook of Qualitative Research (2nd ed.) (pp. 509-535).
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Charmaz, K. (2001). Qualitative interviewing and grounded theory analysis. In J. F.

Gubrium & J. A. Holstein (Eds.), Handbook of interview research (pp. 675-
694). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through

qualitative analysis. London: SAGE.
Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through

qualitative analysis (2nd ed.). London: SAGE.
Charmaz, K., & Mitchell, R. G. (1996). The myth of silent authorship: Self, substance,
and style in ethnographic writing. Symbolic interaction, 19(4), 285-302.
Cheah, B. (2015). Residents call on govt to intervene Portuguese Settlement land

reclamation works. The Sun Daily. Retrieved from
http://www.thesundaily.my/news/1365348
Chiovitti, R. F., & Piran, N. (2003). Rigour and grounded theory research. Journal of
Advanced Nursing, 44, 427–435.
Christensen, I. (2001). Ko te Whare Whakamana: Maori Language Revitalisation.

(Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Massey University, Palmerston North, New
Zealand.
Clarke, A. E. (2003). Situational analysis: Grounded theory mapping after the

postmodern turn. Symbolic Interaction, 26(4), 553-576.
Clarke, A. E. (2005). Situational analysis: Grounded theory after the postmodern turn.
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Clements, J. C. (1991). The Indo-Portuguese Creoles: Languages in transition.

Hispania, 74(3), 637-646.
Cobin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research. California: Sage
Publications, Inc.
Cooper, R. L. (1989). Language planning and social change. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.
Councellor, A. G. L. (2010). Niugnelikuyut (we are making new words): A community

philosophy of language revitalisation. Unpublished doctoral dissertation.
University of Alaska Fairbanks, Alaska.
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2014). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and
Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. London: SAGE.
252
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. L. (2008). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and
Crawford, J. (2000). At war with diversity: U.S. language policy in an age of anxiety.
Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating

quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed.). Boston: Pearson.
Cripen, J. A., & Robinson, L. C. (2013). In defense of the Lone Wolf: Colloboration in
language documentation. Language Documentation & Conversation, 7, 123-
135.
Croft, W. (2003). Mixed languages and acts of identity: An evolutionary approach. In

Matras, Y. & P. Bakker (Eds.), The Mixed Language Debate (pp. 41-72).
Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Crowley, T. (2007). Field Linguistics: A Beginner’s Guide. Oxford University Press.
Day, D., & Nolde, R. (2009). Arresting the decline in Australian indigenous
representation at university: Student experience as a guide. Equal Opportunities
International, 28(2), 135-161.
Dauenhauer, N. M., & Dauenhauer, R. (1998). Technical, emotional, and ideological

issues in reversing language shift: examples from Southeast Alaska. In
Grenoble, L. A. & Whaley, L. J. (Eds.), Endangered languages: Current issues
and future prospects (pp. 57-98). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
David, M. K. (1998). Language shift, cultural maintenance and ethnic identity: A study
of a minority community: The Sindhis of Malaysia. International Journal of the
Sociology of Language, 130, 67–76.
David, M. K., & F. Noor Mohd Noor. (1999). Language maintenance or language shift
in the Portuguese Settlement of Malacca in Malaysia? Migracijske teme, 15,
417-549.
Däwes, B., Fitz, K., & Meyer, S. N. (2015). Twenty-First Century Perspectives on
Indigenous Studies: Native North America in (Trans)Motion. London:
Routledge.
Denzin, N. K. (2007). Grounded theory and the politics of interpretation. In Bryant, A.

& K. Charmaz (Eds.), Handbook of grounded theory (pp. 454-471). London:
Sage.
Descombe, M. (2010). The good research guide: For small-scale social research
projects. Berkshire: Open University Press.
De Witt, D. (2012). Enemies, friends, and relations: Portuguese Eurasians during

Malacca's Dutch era and beyond. In Jarnagin, L. (Ed.), Portuguese and Luso-
Asian legacies in Southeast Asia, 1511-2011: Culture and identity in the Luso-
Asian world: Tenacities and plasticities (pp. 257-272). Singapore: Institute of
Southeast Asian Studies.
253
Doerfler, J., Sinclair, N. J., & Stark, H. K. (2013). Centering Anishinaabeg Studies:
Understanding the World through Stories. Michigan: MSU Press.
Dorian, N. (1981). Language death: The life cycle of a Scottish Gaelic dialect.
Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Dorian, N. (1989). Investigating obsolescence: Studies in language contraction and

death. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dorian, N. C. (1981). Language death: The life cycle of a Scottish Gaelic dialect.
University of Pennsylvania Press.
Dorian, N. C. (1987). The value of language-maintenance efforts which are unlikely to

succeed. Retrieved from http://www.degruyter.com/view/j/ijsl.1987.issue-
68/ijsl.1987.68.57/ijsl.1987.68.57.xml
Dorian, N. C. (1993). A response to Ladefoged’s other view of endangered languages.

Language, 69(3), 575-579. doi:10.2307/416699
Dorian, N. C. (1994). Purism vs. compromise in language revitalisation and language

revival. Language in Society, 23(04), 479–494.
Dorian, N. C. (1998). Western language ideologies and small-language prospects. In

Grenoble, L. A. & Whaley, L. J. (Eds.), Endangered languages: Current issues
and future prospects (pp. 3–21). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Duranti, A. (1997). Linguistic anthropology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Errington, J. J. (2001). Ideology. In A. Duranti (Ed.), Key Terms in Language and

Culture (pp. 110–112). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Farman, G., Natriello, G., & Dornbusch, S. M. (1978). Social Studies and Motivation:
High School Students’ Perceptions of the Articulation of Social Studies to
Work, Family and Community. Theory & Research in Social Education, 6(3),
27–39. http://doi.org/10.1080/00933104.1978.10506037
Fernandis, G. (1995). (Ed.). Save our Portuguese heritage conference 95, Malacca,
Malaysia. Malacca: Author's own.
Fernandis, G. (2000). Papia, Relijang e Tradisang - The Portuguese Eurasians in

Malaysia: Bumiquest, A Search for Self Identity. Lusotopie, 261-68.
Fernandis, G. (2003). The Portuguese community at the periphery: A minority report on

the Portuguese quest for bumiputera status. Kajian Malaysia, XX1(1&2), 285-
301.
Fishman, J. A. (1988). Language and ethnicity in minority sociolinguistic perspective.

Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.
Fishman, J. A. (1991). Reversing Language Shift: Theoretical and Empirical

Foundations of Assistance to Threatened Languages. Clevedon: Multilingual
Matters.
254
Fishman, J. A. (2001). Can Threatened Languages be Saved?: Reversing Language
Shift, Revisited : A 21st Century Perspective. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Gal, S. (1979). Language shift: Social determinants of linguistic change in bilingual

Austria. New York: Academic Press.
Garrett, P. B. (2004). Language contact and contact languages. In Duranti, A. (Ed.), A

companion to linguistic anthropology (pp. 46–72). Oxford: Blackwell
Garett, P. B. (2006). Contact languages as "endangered languages". What is there to

lose? Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages, 21(1), 175-190.
Garrett, P., Coupland, N., & Williams, A. (2003). Investigating language attitudes:
Social meanings of dialect, ethnicity and performance. Cardiff: University of
Wales Press.
Glaser, B. G. (1978). Theoretical sensitivity. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.
Glaser, B. G. (1992). Basics of grounded theory analysis. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology
Press.
Glaser, B. G. (1998). Doing grounded theory: Issues and discussions. Mill Valley, CA:
Sociology Press.
Glaser, B. G. (2005). The grounded theory perspective III: Theoretical coding. Mill
Valley, CA: Sociology Press.
Glaser, B. G. (2007). Doing formal theory. In Bryant, A. & K. Charmaz (Eds.), The
SAGE handbook of grounded theory (pp. 97-113). London: Sage.
Glaser. B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1965). Awareness of dying. Chicago: Aldine.
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for
qualitative research (7th printing). New Jersey: Aldine Transaction Publisher.
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (2009). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies
for Qualitative Research. Transaction Publishers.
Grenoble, L. A., & Whaley, L. J. (1998). Endangered languages: Current issues and
future prospects. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Grenoble, L. A., & Whaley, L. J. (1998). Toward a typology of language endangerment.

In Grenoble, L. A. & Whaley, L. J. (Eds.), Endangered languages: Current
issues and future prospects (pp. 22-54). Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Grenoble, L. A., & Whaley, L. J. (2006). Saving languages: An introduction to

language revitalisation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Goh, B.-L. (2002). Modern dreams: An inquiry into power, cultural production, and the
cityscape in contemporary urban Penang, Malaysia. New York, U.S.: Cornell
Southeast Asia Program.
255
Grbich, C. F. (2013). Qualitative data analysis: An introduction. London: Sage.
Haarmann, H. (1990) Language planning in the light of a general theory of language: A

methodological framework. International Journal of the Sociology of Language,
86, 103-126.
Hancock, I. F. (1969). The Malacca Creoles and their language. Afrasian, 3: 38-45.
Hancock, I. F. (1975). Malacca Creole Portuguese: Asian, African or European?

Anthropological Linguistics, 17(5), 211-36.
Hancock, I. F. (2009). The Portuguese Creoles of Malacca. Bucureşti, 3-4, 295-306.
Hancock, I. F. (2015). Papia Kristang: The Creole Portuguese of Malacca and

Singapore. Retrieved from http://www.kreolmagazine.com/arts-culture/history-
and-culture/papia-kristang-the-creole-portuguese-of-malacca-and-singapore/
Houser, N., & Kloesel, C. J. W. (Eds.). (1992). The essential Peirce: Selected
philosophical writings (1867-1893). Indiana: Indiana University Press.
Heins, E. (1975). Kroncong and Tanjidor - Two cases of urban folk music in Jakarta.
Asian Music, 7(1), 20-32.
Hill, J. H. (2002). “Expert rhetorics” in advocacy for endangered languages: Who is

listening, and what do they hear? Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 12(2),
119–33.
Hill, J. H., & Hill, K. (1986). Speaking Mexicano: Dynamics of a Syncretic Language
in Central Mexico. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.
Hinton, L. (2001). Language revitalisation: An overview. In Hinton, L. & K. Hale

(Eds.), The green book of language revitalisation in practice (pp.3-18). New
York: Academic Press.
Hinton, L., & Hale, K. (Eds.). (2001). The green book of language revitalisation in
practice. San Diego: Academic Press.
Holton, (2007). The coding process and its challenges. In Bryant, A. & K. Charmaz,
(Eds.), The SAGE handbook of grounded theory, (pp. 265-290). London: SAGE.
Hornberger, N. H. (2002). Multilingual language policies and the continua of biliteracy:

An ecological approach. Language Policy, 1(1), 27–51.
http://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014548611951
Holm, J. (1989). Pidgins and creoles. Vol.2, Reference survey. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Hymes, D. (ed.) (1964). Language in culture and society: A reader in linguistics and
anthropology. New York: Harper & Row.
256
Hymes, D. (1974). Ways of Speaking. In Bauman, R. & J. Sherzer (Eds.), Explorations
in the Ethnography of Speaking (pp. 433–451). Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Irvine, J. (1989). When talk isn't cheap: Language and political economy. American
Ethnologist, 16, 248-267.
Jakobson, R. (1957). The Framework of Language. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan

Press.
Jourdan, C., & Angeli, J. (2014). Pijin and shifting language ideologies in urban
Solomon Islands. Language in Society, 43, 265-285.
King, K. A. (2001). Language revitalisation processes and prospects: Quichua in the

Ecuadorian Andes. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Korsang. (n.d.). Retrieved June 12, 2015, from

https://www.facebook.co/pages/Korsang/423307147710475
Kijai, J., Lampadan, R., & Loo, D. B. (2012). Factors related to language shift among
the Tindal population in Ratau, Kota Belud, Sabah. Catalyst, 7, 4-13.
Kroskrity, P. V. (Ed). (2000). Regimes of language: Ideologies, polities, and identities.

Santa Fe, NM: School of American Research Press.
Kroskrity, P. V. (2004). Language ideologies. In Duranti, A. (Ed.), A companion to

linguistic anthropology (pp. 496-517). Oxford: Blackwell.
Kroskrity, P. V., & Field, M. (Eds). (2009). Native American language ideologies:
Beliefs, practices, and struggles in Indian country. Tucson: University of
Arizona Press.
Kroskrity, P.V. (2014). Borders traversed, boundaries erected: Creating discursive

identities and language communities in the Village of Tewa. Language &
Communication, 38, 8-17.
Kumar, K. (2015, March 25). Malacca Portuguese upset over land reclamation.
Malaysiakini. Retrieved from http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/293207
Kulick, D. (1992). Language shift and cultural reproduction: Socialization, self and
syncretism in a Papua New Guinean village. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Ladefoged, P. (1992). Another view of endangered languages. Language, 68, 809-811.
Lee, E. (2004). Language shift and revitalisation in the Kristang community,

Portuguese Settlement, Malacca. (Unpublished PhD dissertation). Department of
English Language and Linguistics, University of Sheffield.
Lee, E. (2011). Language maintenance and competing priorities at the Portuguese

Settlement, Malacca. Paper presented at the South Eastern Conference on
257
Linguistics LXXV111 (SECOL 78), Dept of Linguistics, University of
Georgia, Georgia, USA.
Lee, L. (2015). Land reclamation adversely affects Portuguese Settlement. The Ant
Daily. Retrieved from http://www.theantdaily.com/Main/Land-reclamation-
adversely-affects-Portuguese-Settlement
Lee, K. H. & Tan, C. B. (Eds). 2000. Chinese schools in Malaysia: a case of cultural
resilience. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: Oxford University Press.
Lempert, L. B. (2007). Asking questions of the data: Memo writing in the grounded
theory tradition. In Bryant, A. & K. Charmaz (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of
grounded theory (pp. 245-264). London: SAGE.
Lim, L., & Ansaldo, U. (2015). Languages in Contact. Cambridge University Press.
Lowenberg, P. H. (1991). Variation in Malaysian English: The pragmatics of language

in contact. In Chesire, J. (Ed.), English around the world: sociolinguistic
perspectives (pp. 364–375). Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
Loy, T.-C. J. (2010). Dynasting across cultures: A grounded theory of Malaysian

Chinese family firms. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of
Minnesota, Minneapolis, United States.
Madiwale, S. (2013). A grounded theory analysis of early treatment motivation in

Anorexia Nervosa. Retrieved from
http://ses.library.usyd.edu.au:80/handle/2123/9826
Marbeck, J. (1995). Ungua adanza – An inheritance. Malacca: Loh Printing Press.
Marbeck, J. (Ed.). (1996). A revival of Spoken Kristang and the Development of the
Malacca-Portuguese Heritage. Malacca: Joan Marbeck.
Marbeck, J. (2004). Linggu mai – Mother tongue: A Kristang keepsake. Lisbon,

Portugal: Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation.
Marbeck, J. (2011a). Commemorative Bahasa Serani dictionary.
Marbeck, J. (2011b). Bersu Serani – Eurasian verse and song.
Marbeck, J. (2011c). Speak Serani – Comprehensive Bahasa Serani language book.
Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Cultural variation in the self-concept. In

Goethals, G. R & J. Strauss (Eds.), Multidisciplinary perspectives on the self
(pp. 18-48). New York: Springer-Verlag.
Maros, M., Abdul Halim, N. A., Mohd. Zaki, N. F., Che Abdul Rahman, A. N., Razak,
S. S., Kaswandi, S. S., Wan Rosmidi, W. F. H. (2014). Portuguese Settlement
community's awareness and response to Papia Kristang language shift. Procedia
- Social and Behavioural Sciences, 118, 273-281.
258
Marquis, Y., & Sallabank, J. (2013). Speakers and language revitalisation: A case study
of Guernesiais (Guernsey). In Jones, M. C. & S. Ogilvie (Eds.), Keeping
Languages Alive: Documentation, Pedagogy, and Revitalisation (pp. 169-180).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
May, S. (1999). Indigenous Community-based Education. Clevedon: Multilingual

Matters.
May, S. (2001). Language and minority rights: Ethnicity, nationalism and the politics of
language. London: Longman.
May, S. (2003). Rearticulating the case for minority language rights. Current Issues in
Language Planning, 4, 95-125.
May, S. A. (2011). Language and Minority Rights: ethnicity, nationalism and the
politics of language (2nd). New York: Routledge.
McCarty, T. L. (2002). A place to be Navajo: Rough rock and the struggle for self-
determination in indigenous schooling. London: Routledge.
McNickle, E. A. (2009). A grounded theory study of intrinsic work motivation factors

influencing public utility employees aged 55 and older as related to retirement
decisions. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Capella University, Minneapolis.
Retrieved from http://gradworks.umi.com/33/72/3372746.html
Moseley, C. (Ed.). 2010. Atlas of the World’s Languages in Danger (3rd ed.). Paris:
UNESCO Publishing. Online version:
http://www.unesco.org/culture/en/endangeredlanguages/atlas
Mühlhäusler, P. (2000). Language planning and language ecology. Current Issues in

Language Planning, 1(3), 306-307.
Mühlhäusler, P. (2003). Language endangerment and language revival. Journal of

Sociolinguistics, 7(2), 232-45.
Mufwene, S. S. (2001). The Ecology of Language Evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.
Mufwene, S. S. (2003). Language endangerment: What have pride and prestige got to
do with it? In Joseph, B. D., DeStefano, J., Jacobs, N. G. & I. Lehiste (Eds.),
When languages collide: Perspectives on language conflict, language
competition, and language coexistence (pp. 324–345). Columbus: Ohio State
University Press.
Mufwene, S. S. (2008). Language evolution: contact, competition and change.

Continuum.
Mufwene, S. S. (2013). The origins and the evolution of language. In K. Allan (Ed.),
The Oxford Handbook of the History of Linguistics (pp. 13–52). OUP Oxford.
259
Muksyen, P. (1988). Are creoles a special type of language? In Newmeyer, F. J. (Ed.),
Linguistics: the Cambridge survey. Vol. 2: Linguistic theory: extensions and
implications (pp. 285-301). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Myhill, J. (1999). Identity, territoriality and minority language survival. Journal of

Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 20(1), 34-50.
Nasrin, H., Soroor, P., & Soodabeh, J. (2012). Nursing Challenges in Motivating
Nursing Students through Clinical Education: A Grounded Theory Study.
Nursing Research and Practice, 2012, e161359.
http://doi.org/10.1155/2012/161359
Nunes, M. P. (1996). By how many speakers, by whom, with whom, and for what
purposes, is Kristang still used in the Portuguese Settlement of Malacca? Paper
presented at the CIEC Conference (Colloque International d’Études Créoles),
Guadaloupe, Carribean islands.
Ochs, E. (2004). Narrative lessons. In Duranti, A. (Ed.), A companion to linguistic

anthropology (pp. 269-289). Oxford: Blackwell.
Omar, A. H. (1982). Language and society in Malaysia. Selangor, Malaysia: Zizi Press
Sdn. Bhd.
Omar, A. H. (1987). Malay in its sociocultural context. Selangor, Malaysia: Zizi Press
Sdn. Bhd.
O’Neilll, B. J. (2008). Displaced identities among the Malacca Portuguese. In Roseman,

S. R. & S. S. Parkhurst (Eds.), Recasting culture and space in Iberian contexts
(pp. 55-80). Albany: State University of New York Press.
Organising Committee of Festa San Pedro. (2013). Festa San Pedro Portuguese
Settlement Melaka traditions lives on [souvenir program]. Malacca town,
Malacca: Organising committee of Festa San Pedro.
O'Shannesy, C. (2011). Language contact and change in endangered languages. In

Austin, P. K. & J. Sallabank (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Endangered
Languages (pp. 78-99). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Overee, G. (2013). Teaching Portuguese dances. In Pillai, S. (Ed.), Malaccan

Portuguese Creole: A Portuguese-based Creole. London: Endangered
Languages Archive (ELAR) [distributor]. Retrieved from
http://elar.soas.ac.uk/deposit/pillai2012malaccan
Peirce, C. S. (1931–58). Collected Papers. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of

Harvard University Press.
Pillai, S. (2013). Malaccan Portuguese Creole: A Portuguese-based Creole. London:

Endangered Languages Archive (ELAR) [distributor].
http://elar.soas.ac.uk/deposit/pillai2012malaccan
Pillai S., & Khan, M. H. (2011). I am not English but my first language is English:
English as a first language among Portuguese Eurasians in Malaysia. In
260
Mukherjee, D. & M. K. David (Eds.), National Language Planning and
Language Shifts in Malaysian Minority Communities: Speaking in Many
Tongues (pp. 87-100). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
Pillai, S., Soh, W. Y., & Kajita, A. S. (2014). Family language policy and heritage
language maintenance of Malacca Portuguese Creole. Language &
Communication, 37: 75-85.
Pires, E. (2010). Reading Emptiness: On Tourism, Appropriation and Contested Spaces.

iNtergraph: Journal of Dialogic Anthropology, 3(1). Retrieved from
http://intergraph-journal.net/enhanced/vol3issue1/3.html
Pitawanakwat, B. (2009). Anishinaabemodas pane oodenang – A qualitative study of

Anishinaabe language revitalisation as self-determination in Manitoba and
Ontario. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Victoria, Melbourne.
Platt, J., & Weber, H. (1980). English in Singapore and Malaysia: Status, features,
functions. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: Oxford University Press.
Platt, J, Weber, H., & Lian, H. M. (1983). Singapore and Malaysia: Varieties of English
around the world. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.
Quakenbush, J. S. (2007). SIL International and endangered Austronesian languages. In

Rau, V. & M. Florey (Eds.), Documenting and revitalising Austronesian
languages (pp. 42-65). Hawaii: National Foreign Language Resource Center.
Rêgo, A. da S. (1942). Dialecto Português de Malacca: Apontamentos para o sue

Estudo. Lisbon: Agência Geral das Colόnias.
Rêgo, A. da S., & Baxter, A. N. (1998). Dialecto Português de Malacca e outros

escritos. [Reedition of the 1942 edition, including re-edition of some of the
author’s articles]. Lisboa: Comissão Nacional para as Comemorações dos
Descobrimentos Portugueses.
Reichertz, J. (2007). Abduction: The logic of discovery of Grounded Theory. In Bryant,

A. & Kathy C. (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Grounded Theory, (pp.214-228).
London: SAGE.
Ricento, T. (2006). An introduction to language policy: Theory and method. Oxford,

UK: Blackwell.
Ruby, M. (2012). The role of a grandmother in maintaining Bangla with her

granddaughter in East London. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural
Development, 33(1), 67-83.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of
intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American
Psychologist, 5(1), 68-78.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2002). Overview of self-determination theory: An

organismic dialectical perspective. In Deci, E. L. & R. M. Ryan
261
(Eds.), Handbook of self-determination research (pp. 3-33). NY: The University
of Rochester Press.
Sallabank, J. (2005). Prestige from the bottom up: A review of language planning in
Guernsey French. Current Issues in Language Planning, 6(1), 44-63.
Sallabank, J. (2013). Attitudes to Endangered Languages: Identities and Policies.

Cambridge University Press.
Sarkissian, M. (1995). ‘Sinhalese Girl’ meets ‘Aunty Annie’: Competing expressions of

ethnic identity in the Portuguese Settlement, Malacca, Malaysia. Asian Music,
27(1), 37-62.
Sarkissian, M. (1997). Cultural chameleons: Portuguese Eurasian strategies for survival

in Postcolonial Malaysia. Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, 28(2), 249-262.
Sarkissian, M. (2000). D’Albuquerque’s Children: Performing Tradition in Malaysia’s

Portuguese Settlement. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Sarkissian, M. (2005). Being Portuguese in Malacca: The politics of folk culture in

Malaysia. Etnográfica, IX(1), 149-170.
Schwartz, M. (2008). Exploring the relationship between family language policy and
heritage language knowledge among second generation Russian-Jewish
Immigrants in Israel. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 29
(5), 400-418.
Seaman, J. (2008). Adopting a grounded theory approach to cultural-historical research:

Conflicting methodologies or complementary methods? International Journal of
Qualitative Methods, 7(1), 1-17.
Siegel, J. (1997). Using a pidgin language in formal education: help or hindrance?

Applied linguistics, 18(1), 86-100.
Siegel, J. (1999). Creoles and minority dialects in education. Journal of Multilingual

and Multicultural Development, 20(6), 508-531.
Singh, R. (2015, March 25). Heritage being destroyed to make way for Malacca
Gateway, claims Portuguese settlement. The Rakyat Post. Retrieved from
http://www.therakyatpost.com/news/2015/03/25/heritage-being-destroyed-to-
make-way-for-malacca-gateway-claims-portuguese-settlement/
Smith, K. J. (2003). Minority language education in Malaysia: Four ethnic communities'

experiences. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism,
6(1), 52-65.
Speas, M. (2009). Someone else’s language: On the role of linguists in language

revitalisation. In J. Reyhner & L. Lockard (Eds.), Indigenous Language
Revitalisation: Encouragement, Guidance & Lessons Learned (pp. 23-36).
Flagstaff: Northern Arizona University.
Spolsky, B. (2004). Language policy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
262
Sta Maria, B. (1982). My people my country: The story of the Malacca Portuguese
community. Malacca: The Portuguese Development Centre.
Star, S. L. (2007). Living grounded theory: Cognitive and emotional forms of

pragmatism. In Bryant, A. & Kathy C. (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of
Grounded Theory (pp. 75-93). London: SAGE.
Stern, P. N. (2007). On solid ground: Essential properties for growing grounded theory.
In Bryant, A. & K. Charmaz (Eds.), The handbook of grounded theory (pp.
114-126). London: SAGE.
Strauss, A., & Cobin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory
procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.
Strauss, A., & Cobin, J. (1997). Grounded theory in practice. California: SAGE.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. M. (1998). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and
Sudesh, N. (2000). Language maintenance and shift among the Portuguese -

Eurasians in the Portuguese Settlement. (Unpubished master’s thesis).
University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur.
Teixeira, M. (1963). The Portuguese Missions in Malacca and Singapore (1511-1958),

Volume 3: Singapore. Lisbon: Agencia Geral do Ultramar.
The Government of Malaysia. (2013). Language. Retrieved from

https://www.malaysia.gov.my/en/aboutmalaysia?subCatId=3208956&type=2&c
The Malay Mail Online. Melaka Gateway project will go ahead, says Idris. (2015,
March 4). The Malay Mail Online. Retrieved July 2, 2015, from
http://www.themalaymailonline.com/malaysia/article/melaka-gateway-project-
will-go-ahead-says-idris
Thieberger, N. (2002). Extinction in whose terms? Which parts of a language constitute

a target for language maintenance programmes? In Bradley, D. & M. Bradley
(Eds.), Language Endangerment and Language Maintenance: An Active
Approach (pp. 310-328). London: Routledge.
Thomaz, L. F. F. R. (2000). Early Portuguese Malacca [based on passages selected

from Os Portugueses em Malacca (1511-1580) submitted as a thesis in 1964].
Macau: Macau Territorial Commission for the Commemorations of the
Portuguese Discoveries.
Thornberg, R., & Charmaz, K. (2012). Grounded theory. In S. D. Lapan, M. Quartaroli,

& F. Reimer (Eds.), Qualitative research: An introduction to methods and
designs (pp. 41-67). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley/Jossey-Bass
Thurgood, E., & Thurgood, G. (1996). Aspect, tense, or aktionsart? The particle ja
in Kristang (Malacca Creole Portuguese). Journal of Pidgin and Creole
Languages, 11, 45-70.
263
Ting, S.-H. & Sussex, R. (2002). Language choice among the Foochows in Sarawak,
Malaysia. Multilingua, 21, 1-15.
Trudell, B. (2006). Local Agency in the Development of Minority Languages: Three

Language Committees in Northwest Cameroon. Journal of Multilingual and
Multicultural Development, 27(3), 196–210.
Urquhart, C. (2007). The evolving nature of Grounded Theory Method: The case of the
Information Systems Discipline. In Bryant, A. & Kathy, C. (Eds.), The SAGE
Handbook of Grounded Theory, (pp. 339-360). London: SAGE.
Urquhart, C. (2013). Grounded Theory for Qualitative Research: A Practical Guide.

London: SAGE.
Wendel, J., & Heinrich, P. (2012). A framework for language endangerment dynamics:
The effects of contact and social change on language ecologies and language
diversity. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 218, 145-166.
Wallace, A. R. (1989). The Malay Archipelago. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: Oxford

University Press.
Winford, D. (2003). An introduction to contact linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell.
Winstedt, R.O. (1923). Malaya, the Straits Settlements and the Federated and
Unfederated Malay States. London, U.K.: Constable & Co. Ltd.
Woolard, K. (1998). Introduction: Language ideology as a field of inquiry. In B.

Schieffelin, K. Woolard & Kroskrity, P. (Eds.), Language ideologies: Practice
and theory (pp. 3–47). New York, U.S.: Oxford University Press.
264
LIST OF PUBLICATIONS AND PAPERS PRESENTED
Published paper Pillai, S., Soh, W.Y., & Kajita, A. S. (2014). Family language
policy and heritage language maintenance of Malacca Portuguese
Creole. Language & Communication, 37, 75-85.
Pillai, S., Soh, W.Y., & Yusuf, Y. Q. (Accepted for publication).

Perceptions about one’s heritage language: The case of the
Acehnese in Kampung Aceh and Malacca Portuguese-Eurasians
in the Portuguese Settlement in Malaysia. Kajian Malaysia.
Papers presented Pillai, S., Soh, W.Y., & Kajita, A. S. (2012, Nov). Family
at conferences language policy and heritage language maintenance of Malacca
Portuguese Creole. Paper presented at the International
Conference of Linguistics, Literature and Culture, Georgetown,
Penang, Malaysia.
Soh, W.Y., & Pillai, S. (2014, Nov). Motivations of language

revitalisation: The case of Malacca Portuguese Creole. Paper
presented at the International Conference of Linguistics,
Literature and Culture, Georgetown, Penang, Malaysia.
Soh, W.Y. (2014, Nov). Seeking views on Malacca Portuguese

Creole revitalisation: Reflections from employing a Constructivist
Grounded Theory approach. Paper presented at the 5th Faculty of
Languages & Linguistics Graduate Research Conference, Kuala
Lumpur, Malaysia.
265
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A: INFORMATION SHEET, CONSENT FORM AND

HONORARIUM RECEPTION/DECLINING FORM
INFORMATION SHEET
The aim of this research is to gather information about the heritage language
spoken in Portuguese Settlement and the efforts made towards the language. The research
is being conducted by Soh Wen Yi, a PhD candidate in the Faculty of Languages and
Linguistics, University of Malaya, following her involvement in previous related projects
for the heritage language. It will contribute to the on-going research on the heritage
language and towards her doctorate research.
Wen Yi’s supervisor is Associate Professor Dr. Stefanie Pillai, Department of

English, Faculty of Languages and Linguistics, University of Malaya. Any queries about
the research can be directed to Dr Stefanie Pillai at stefanie@um.edu.my and Wen Yi at
wenyisoh@gmail.com.
You are asked to take part in this study because you have contributed to language
efforts towards the heritage language in study or you are one of the community members
who speak the heritage language. You will be asked to answer questions and discuss in
relation to the language and language efforts. The interview should take about an hour
and it will be audio-recorded if you agree. You may raise any questions should you have
any enquiries or are not sure about the content of the interview. You have the right to
withdraw from this study and to decline answering any questions.
266
Heritage Language Research Study
CONSENT FORM
I have read or been explained on the details of the Information Sheet, and have had the
details of the study explained to me. My questions have been answered to my
satisfactions, and I understand that I may ask further question at any time.
I understand that I have the right to withdraw from the study and to decline to answer any
particular questions.
I agree to provide information to the researcher on the understanding the information will
be used for educational purposes, research reports and publications.
( ) I agree to the interview being audio-recorded
( ) I do not agree to the interview being audio-recorded
I agree to participate in the study under the conditions set above. I agree to allow the use
of my pictures (if any) and voice recording(s) for educational purposes, research reports
and publications.
Signed: ____________________________________________
Name: ____________________________________________
I.C. no.: ____________________________________________
Date: _______________________________________________
267
HONORARIUM RECEPTION FORM
I hereby acknowledge that I have received a token as a favour for my participation in the
language study from the researcher named Soh Wen Yi in the amount of
____________________.
Signed: ____________________________________________
Name: ____________________________________________
I.C. no.: ____________________________________________
Date: _______________________________________________
268
HONORARIUM DECLINED FORM
I hereby acknowledge that I would like to turn down the token as a favour for my
participation in the language study. This is because
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
_________________________
Signed: ____________________________________________
Name: ____________________________________________
I.C. no.: ____________________________________________
Date: _______________________________________________
269
APPENDIX B: PART I SURVEY AND PART II GUIDING QUESTIONS FOR
CONVERSATIONS
Part I Survey: Background of interviewees
Information
Name:
Sex:
Age:
Current/previous (if retired) occupation:
Highest level of education:
Ethnicity:
Remarks on ethnicity:
When filling in public documents
When being asked by people of
other ethnic groups, e.g. Malays,
Chinese
When among your own people
Grew up in:
Currently staying in:
Parents’
Mother/ Father/ Grandmother/
Female guardian Male guardian Grandfather/ Others
Brought up by
Ethnicity
Occupation
Level of education
First language or ∆ Only your ∆ Only your ∆ Only your
language brought up language language language
speaking as a child ∆ Mostly your ∆ Mostly your ∆ Mostly your
language, some language, some language, some
English English English
∆ About equally ∆ About equally ∆ About equally
your language and your language your language and
English and English English
∆ Only English ∆ Only English ∆ Only English
∆ Don’t know ∆ Don’t know ∆ Don’t know
∆ Another language ∆ Another ∆ Another language
language
270
Language Background
1. In general, what do you call your first language or the language you were brought up
speaking as a child?
2. What do you call your language when

You are with someone who understands
and speaks your language
You are with someone who does not
understand your language
3. Do you remember what the adults with whom you were brought up living with call
your language?
4. What other languages do you speak?
5. Where do you use your language?

Tick if applicable
Home
School (in the past if past schooling age)
Work
Church
Ceremonies / Cultural activities
Language classes
With friends and neighbours in Portuguese
Settlement
Outside Portuguese Settlement
Others
6. What language(s) do you read and write in?
7. When you were growing up, what language do you remember adults in your household
using when speaking to each other?
Tick if applicable
Only your language
Mostly your language, some English
About equally your language and English
Only English
Don’t know
Another language
Remarks
271
8. What language do your family members use now when speaking to each other?
Tick if applicable
Only your language
Mostly your language, some English
About equally your language and English
Only English
Don’t know
Another language
Remarks
9. Can you identify the adults who lived in your home when you were growing up, and
what language they spoke to you.
Adult person Language they spoke to you
10. Can you identify any of the below that was applicable when you were growing up?
Tick and specify who if applicable
Family members taught you how to speak
your language?
Any non-family members who taught you
how to speak your language?
Family members who encouraged or
insisted that you speak to them in your
language?
Any non-family members who
encouraged or insisted that you speak to
them in your language?
11. Think of your immediate family going back as many generations as you can. Over
the years, would you say your family has:
( ) generally held on to speaking your language (go to question 8)
( ) generally shifted towards speaking mainly English or another language
12. Can you identify when this shift to English or another language happened and the
reasons for it?
When:
English or another language
Reason(s):
272
13. Can you conduct everyday conversation in your language? (e.g. talking to your child
or parent about school or work, or your friend about going out etc.)
Limited ability
I can only use a few words
It is hard to get my message across
My language is often mixed up and incorrect
I think in English
My language is often hesitant, and sometimes I am not sure of my
pronunciation
Basic ability
I can usually get my message across, although I sometimes don’t have a
wide enough vobulary
Sometimes my language is mixed up and incorrect, except for short
sentences
I usually think in English
Sometimes my language is hesitant, but pronunciation is usually good
Good ability
I can always get my message across, although sometimes I wish for a wider
vocabulary
My language is usually grammatically correct
My responses are usually fluent and automatic
I usually think in my language
Excellent ability
My responses are always fluent and automatic
I can say things in a variety of ways
I can use my language sayings and expressions
My language is grammatically correct
273
14. Can you tell a story to a child in your language (not reading)
Limited ability
I think in English
pronunciation
Basic ability
sentences
Good ability
vocabulary
Excellent ability
274
15. Can you talk in your language about issues that are in the news?
Limited ability
I think in English
pronunciation
Basic ability
sentences
Good ability
vocabulary
Excellent ability
275
16. Can you give directions how to get to the local school in your language?
Limited ability
I think in English
pronunciation
Basic ability
sentences
Good ability
vocabulary
Excellent ability
276
17. Can you talk in your language about something like a TV programme or movie that
you have seen?
Limited ability
I think in English
pronunciation
Basic ability
sentences
Good ability
vocabulary
Excellent ability
277
18. If you were overseas on holiday, could you write a letter or send a text message to a
friend in your language, talking about your experiences?
Limited ability
I think in English
pronunciation
Basic ability
sentences
Good ability
I can always get my message across, although sometimes I wish for a
wider vocabulary
Excellent ability
Remarks If yes, how do you decide how to write in your language?
19. What is your strongest language now?
20. Would you say you always speak your language or you wish you could use it more?
Do any of the following reflect your feelings about your language?
I always speak in my language, as I would like to use it more, but
∆ it is the mostly used language with my ∆ I often do not know how to say things
family (specify who speak ∆ I often forget and slip into using
it:___________________) English
∆ it is the mostly used language with my ∆ it is easier to use English
friends who speak my language ∆ there are not enough other people
∆ it is easy/natural to use it living here who can also speak your
∆ it is the language I grew up speaking language.
∆ it is the language of my people ∆ it is not used in our other activities
except for dance and singing
278
21. Below lists some questions on your confidence in the different aspects of your
language?
Your pronunciation ∆ extremely confident
∆ confident
∆ a little confident
∆ not confident
How you form your ∆ extremely confident
sentences ∆ confident
∆ not confident
The range of vocabulary ∆ extremely confident
that you can choose words ∆ confident
from ∆ a little confident
∆ not confident
Your ability to use sayings ∆ extremely confident
and expressions ∆ confident
∆ not confident
Your ability to ∆ extremely confident
communicate as well as ∆ confident
you would like to ∆ a little confident
∆ not confident
The influence that thinking ∆ extremely confident
in English might be having ∆ confident
on your language ∆ a little confident
∆ not confident
22. Where is your language used?

Tick if applicable
Home
With family and relatives in Portuguese Settlement
With friends in Portuguese Settlement
Church
Religious classes or ceremonies (e.g. baptism and Catholic classes)
Ceremonies (e.g. weddings and funerals)
Cultural practices (e.g. Intrudo, San Juan, San Pedro)
School
23. Do you think there is a need to standardise the name of the language? What is your
preference?
□Kristang □ Papiah □Portuguese □Malaccan □ others,
Kristang Portuguese _______
279
Part II Guiding Questions for Conversations
(A) Questions for people involved in language revitalisation efforts
1. Please tell me about the work you have done.

-What type of work
- How long have you been doing this
- Objectives / Long term visions of your work
2. How did you get started in these works/language revitalisation efforts?

- Motivations
3. What are your methods?

- Methods based on what source, what considerations
- Did you consult anyone such as the community members?
4. What materials do you use?

- Materials based on what source and what considerations?
- How did you decide on the spelling?
5. There can be different outcomes of your work.

- Who are the target group of your work?
- What do you hope to achieve in your work?
6. Did/Do you get support from the community?

- What about financial support?
- If you had unlimited financial and other resources to design a language program, what
would you create?
7. From your observation, how would you describe the people?

- What do you think define being a member of your people?
- Are there any values that are important to the people?
8. From your observation, is language seen as an important part of the people? If yes, in
what ways and important to who?
- Why is the language important? What are the values and advantages of speaking the
language?
- Do you think the people’s culture and traditions can continue even though in the future,
people no longer speak the language?
- To be a member of the community, do you think one must speak and understand the
language? What are the criteria to be one of the people?
9. Can you share with us if you have experienced any challenges or obstacles in your
work?
10. From your observation or experience, how would you describe the status of the
language?
- How would you describe the community’s attitudes towards the language?
- How would you describe the community’s attitudes towards your language efforts?
- Do you think the people who can speak your language are respected? What about those
who speak little of it or don’t speak it?
280
11. Do you think your work has received the recognition or response you anticipated or
wished for?
- Can you identify anything which would help maintain the language or help with
language efforts?
12. Do you know the origin of the language?

Tick if applicable
Old Portuguese
A variety of Portuguese
A language that developed based on
Portuguese with some influence from
other languages in Malaysia such as
Malay
Other(s)
281
13. With efforts, what do you think can be achieved in the future?
i. efforts
Tick if
applicable
Children know how to speak in your language at home and in the
Portuguese Settlement
Children know how to write in your language
Children and adults can learn your language using online dictionary and
materials.
Teaching of your language to children in kindergarten
Teaching of your language to children in primary school
Teaching of your language to children in secondary school
Teaching of your language to adults who are less fluent or confident by

the elders
Create a second-language program for adults who do not speak your

language as their first language
Parents teaching your language at home, making it children’s first

language
Develop classes for parents to guide and support them in teaching your
language to their children as a first language at home
Support and encourage the use of language in cultural practices

* What cultural practices can possibly be considered for the supporting
and encouraging the use of your language?
Support and encourage the use of your language in church or for religious
activities
Publish your language in print (e.g. newsletter, magazines, newspapers)
The increase of vocabulary in adapting to new concepts and modernity
More documentations of your language can be done to record the language

used by the elderly generation.
282
ii. language fluency
full fluency of all community members
spoken command by all community members in all domains
full fluency for some community members in many domains
full fluency for some to most community members in some domains
partial knowledge among some community members with fluency on

some topics and in limited to restricted domains
use of language limited to set phrases and memorized texts
14. Would you say the language has different varieties? (e.g. like how Malay has
Kelantanese Malay and Malaccan Malay) / Do you notice some people in Portuguese
Settlement or other people outside Portuguese Settlement who speak your language
differently?
15. Is there anything you would like to add on this topic?
283
(B) Questions for the recipient community
1. Have you heard of any language-related efforts?

Tick if
applicable
Documentations of your language such as being interviewed in your
language, being recorded completing certain tasks speaking in your
language, being asked to teach in your language, being consulted for
grammar or vocabulary for a project
Documentations of your culture with or without using your language
Contribute to works published in your language (e.g. dictionary, stories,
grammar)
Language classes
Others
None
2. Have you participated in any of the language efforts?

- If answer is yes – What did/ do you feel about your experience in your participation in
any language revitalisation efforts? Did/ do you enjoy it?
3. Have you seen or do you know anyone who has worked on documenting, promoting
or teaching your language?
- If yes, what did/do they do?
4. What do you feel about these efforts and the people who have done some work on your
language?
- Do you agree with what they have done?
5. There are some people who have been working on promoting, recording/documenting
or teaching your language. What do you hope they can do to help your community
members continue speaking your language?
6. There have been some materials published in your language such as dictionary,
grammar, word list, stories, poems, songs, etc. (Show works in the language) Have you
come across any of these?
- How do you feel about seeing your language written down and recorded in these
books/materials?
- Do you or your friends and family use any of these materials? If no - Why do you think
materials like these are not used?
- Do you think these materials are useful in teaching or learning your language?
7. How would you describe your people?

- What do you think define being a member of your people?
- Are there any values or principles that are important for your people?
8. Is language seen as an important part of your people? If yes, in what ways and important
to who?
- Why is your language important? What are the values and advantages of speaking
your language?
- Do you think your culture and traditions can continue even though in the future, people
no longer speak your language?
284
- To be a member of your community, do you think one must speak and understand
your language? What are the criteria to be one of your people?
9. From your observation or experience, how would you describe the status of your
language?
- How would you describe the community’s attitudes towards your language?
- How would you describe the community’s attitudes towards language efforts?
- Do you think the people who can speak your language are respected? What about
those who speak little of it or don’t speak it?
10. On your part, are you doing anything to help keep your language alive?
- Do you think speaking the language at home is one way to keep your language alive?
- Do you talk to your grandparents / parents / children / friends (use those applicable)
about what is going to happen to your language in the future, say 10-20 years?
11. If you had unlimited financial and other resources to design a language program or
any language efforts, what would you create?
- What do you think the language efforts should be based on? Based on what
considerations, factors or values?
- What do you hope to achieve in the work you suggested? Who do you think you should
target in your work?
- Who do you think should play a role in getting more people involved in language efforts?
12. Can you identify anything which would help you in maintaining your language in
your family or community?
13. If a child asked you about the origin of your language, would you say it is
Tick if applicable
Old Portuguese
A dialect / variety of Portuguese
A Portuguese-based language that
emerged as a medium of communication
among people who did not have a
language in common and became a creole
upon nativisation
*Remarks: Have you heard of the term
creole? What do you think of the term?
Other(s)
14. Would you say the language has different varieties? (e.g. like how Malay has
Kelantanese Malay and Malaccan Malay) / Do you notice some people in Portuguese
285
Settlement or other people outside Portuguese Settlement who speak your language
differently?
∆ no
∆ yes
Can you identify the

differences?
Can you tell where or in

which families the
different varieties are
spoken?
286
15. With efforts, which of the below do you hope will happen in the future:
i. efforts
Tick if
applicable
Children know how to speak in your language at home and in the
Portuguese Settlement
Children know how to write in your language
Children and adults can learn your language using online dictionary and
materials.
Teaching of your language to children in kindergarten
Teaching of your language to children in primary school
Teaching of your language to children in secondary school
Teaching of your language to adults who are less fluent or confident by

the elders
Create a second-language program for adults who do not speak your

language as their first language
Parents teaching your language at home, making it children’s first

language
Develop classes for parents to guide and support them in teaching your
language to their children as a first language at home
Support and encourage the use of language in cultural practices

* What cultural practices can possibly be considered for the supporting
and encouraging the use of your language?
Support and encourage the use of your language in church or for religious
activities
Publish your language in print (e.g. newsletter, magazines, newspapers)
The increase of vocabulary in adapting to new concepts and modernity
More documentations of your language can be done to record the language

used by the elderly generation.
287
ii. language fluency
full fluency of all community members
spoken command by all community members in all domains
full fluency for some community members in many domains
full fluency for some to most community members in some domains
partial knowledge among some community members with fluency on

some topics and in limited to restricted domains
use of language limited to set phrases and memorized texts
16. Is there anything you would like to add on this topic?
288

Soh Wen Yi Final Thesis Submission Title Page To Appendices PDF

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Soh Wen Yi Final Thesis Submission Title Page To Appendices PDF

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

MANAGING HERITAGE LANGUAGE RELEVANCE AND

LANGUAGE REVITALISATION: THE CASE OF MALACCA

FACULTY OF LANGUAGES AND LINGUISTICS

THESIS SUBMITTED IN FULFILMENT OF THE

FACULTY OF LANGUAGES AND LINGUISTICS

Name of Candidate: (I.C/Passport No: )

I do solemnly and sincerely declare that:

Candidate’s Signature Date:

Subscribed and solemnly declared before,

Witness’s Signature Date:

Portuguese Creole (MPC), is a Portuguese-based contact language undergoing language

shift, spoken as heritage language by a concentrated population of approximately 800

of PS MPC-speaking group members, as illuminated by the language revitalisation

instrument. Research participants were MPC speakers involved in revitalisation efforts

researcher moved between research procedures including data collection, coding,

constant comparative method, memo-writing and theoretical sampling; analysis and

conceptualisation were simultaneous. Theoretical sampling, the second phase of data

collection according to theoretical relevance, proceeded by contacting research

dynamics and voices of a contact-language-speaking group to the forefront. The core

of a basic social process or central phenomenon as pursued in a Grounded Theory study.

explicitly, in comparison with non-language-revitalisation-actors whose coping strategies

socio-psychological and emotional dimension of the process. To understand this self-

managing dimension and because self-constructing is not an isolated process, a socio-

dynamics of a contact-language-speaking group in managing heritage language relevance

revitalisation process cycle.

(Baxter, 2013) dan sedang mengalami pengalihan bahasa di tempat kajian,

Perkampungang Portugis (PS), Melaka, Semenanjung Malaysia. Perkembangan MPC

Perancangan penyelidikan tesis ini merujuk kepada Constructivist Grounded Theory

(Charmaz, 2006, 2014). Untuk memahami kekurangan respons terhadap usaha

mempergiatkan MPC yang merupakan motivasi penyelidikan ini sementara mengikuti

temuduga sebagai instrumen utama penyelidikan. Peserta penyelidikan terdiri daripada

penerima usaha tersebut. Proses penyelidikan adalah bersifat lelaran sementara

penyelidik megulang-ulangkan proses-proses seperti pengumpulan data, pengekodan,

perbandingan kod, penulisan memo dan pengumpulan data bersifat teoretikal;

penganalisasian data dan pengkonsepan dijalankan serentak. Pengumpulan data bersifat

dijalankan dengan menghubungi peserta penyelidikan, menganalisasi tinjauan,

penyelidikan boleh dikaitkan dengan strategi pengurusan proses umum terhadap

perubahan masyarakat. Ia merujuk kepada proses menguruskan bahasa warisan yang

merupakan suatu aspek kehidupan masyarakat sementara bersambung dengan aspek-

terancam menyumbang kepada pembinaan diri yang mengidentifikasi dengan warisan

bagaimana mereka mengurus kaitan bahasa tersebut boleh menyumbang kepada

mempergiatkan bahasa warisan terancam, MPC.

I would like to extend my heartfelt gratitude to the family and Portuguese

sentimental values in my heart as I spent seven years of my childhood in Malacca. The

research participants of this study, as well as the Portuguese Settlement community as a

their experiences, and to do so would be a loss on my part in embracing multiculturalism

and multilingualism in a fuller sense.

it is my turn to tell others the same.

errors in this thesis are solely my own.

your works or others’ work with me.

as both of you have taught me so.

wonderful “second home”.

your love and support and I love both of you so much.

Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................... vii

Table of Contents .............................................................................................................. x

List of Figures ................................................................................................................. xv

List of Tables.................................................................................................................. xvi

List of Symbols and Abbreviations ............................................................................... xvii

List of Appendices .......................................................................................................xviii

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION .................................................................................. 1

1.1 Motivations of Research .......................................................................................... 1

1.2 Developing a Research Focus .................................................................................. 3

1.3 Purpose Statement and Research Questions ............................................................ 6